I argue the impulse to form a dyadic love bond and not the desire for sexual release accounts for the formation of a universality of the pair bond. This impulse is not recent but has been a pervasive force throughout human history. Recently, a reversionist position has argued we are more of a hybrid species that easily and readily shifts between a pair bond and a plural partner family arrangement. Although most humans live out their lives in a sexually monogamous union, it is not something that comes easily or naturally. Sexual monogamy requires adopting an ethical stance and personal dedication to maintain it. This raises the question: if humans need to be vigilant in their moral commitment to remain sexually faithful, does this vigilance extend also to the domain of love? Is it possible to find greater contentment and life-satisfaction in forming simultaneously sexual and emotional unions with a variety of individuals. This is the central question that lies at the core of the pair bond deniers who insist humans are not a pair bond species and can find fulfilment in a pluralistic love bond. I probe (below) the social and emotional nuances associated with what it means to be in an enduring love bond through exploring the social and psychological complexities often associated with being in love. I will then discuss efforts by groups and individuals who have sought to establish social bonds not organised around an exclusive pair bond, and what their efforts reveal about underlying human psychology. My analysis concludes with rendering an assessment of the relative success of the social and personal experiments in the search to find a more fulfilling arena for love.
Keywords: Pair bond; love; monogamy; polyamour.