Since Adam and Eve

Studying human sexuality from an evolutionary standpoint reveals fascinating truths and origins about behaviors deeply entrenched in human thought. Marriage and monogamy, at least in America, have evolved into an almost instinctual practice, as every child is conditioned to long for her/his "night in shining armour" and "perfect princess." Behavioral studies of related animal species shed light that monogamy is a state preferred only under certain conditions, and has pros and cons. For humans, monogamy is favored because competition for food is not an issue, and dual parental care for an incompetent human child is a huge advantage. The Jewish religion seeks to explain heterosexual monogamy as the plan of God for the human race. Are religious standpoints on monogamy really only concerned with moral and social structure, or are they really etiologies for the more complex biological roots of monogamy?

The same ten or so scattered lines in Genesis 1-3 have been used to support such varied arguments that I start to seriously question if there was any "real meaning" intended for these lines. Here we see quotes from the creation, naming, and flood stories that are interpreted as statements about monogamy and kinship. As always, simple statements are elaborated and given connotations that bolster the sense of utter completeness in marriage. "A man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife" is used to support that marriage is the only way to achieve the highest fulfillment of human personality, a clear stretch from the text.

Now that marriage is the topic of discussion, suddenly male writers start to use creation in Genesis 1 to support female equality. Given the agenda of proving that companionship is one of the two primary functions of marriage, women now need to be seen as more than maids with uterus's. They are elevated to "equals of their husbands" (E&A 403). The process of obtaining a mate to achieve a divine relationship is glorified, so the status of women is heightened to prize worthy. .

Something i found very interesting to note is the parallel between puberty and the "Fall." Here I am talking about the gaining of knowledge, not the disobediance. Before puberty, it is acceptable for a child to be seen naked, correlating to the innocent nature of Adam and Eve before the fall. Puberty, a time of physical and emotional development, carries with it the shameful feelings of nudity. This transition is similar to the fall, where an acquired knowledge and development causes Adam and Eve to be aware and ashamed of their nudity. This ties into previous notions of Genesis 2-3 as an etiology for our biologically rooted tendancy to hide nudity past a certain age.

Another biological theory is that the monogamous sexual relationship is responsible for hidden genitalia. I was going to say that this doesnt jive well with Genesis 2-3, since there was no one else around to have sex with before the fall, in their state of nudity. However, I am reminded that Adam "had sex with all the animals" before the fall, supporting the notion that the monogamy of Adam and Eve may have had something to do with their bashfulness. This is just a thought though, because obviously they were monogamous and happily naked before the fall.