Re-thinking Wistfulness for Tobacco Exclusivity

[Sam Gamgee]

This is most certainly not true. Both men and woman have been shown throughout history to have had multiple sex partners, often out of wedlock. Humans are not monogamous by nature.

Apologies for taking the thread in this direction and derailing. My main point was that a young man today with a smartphone will certainly see more naked bodies than the average young man throughout the ages. I don't think this can be argued.

Sure, people have been having sex (lots of it) all along, not all came to their wedding night a virgin, etc. All said, I disagree that humans are not monogamous by nature. What else explains the particular type of jealousy and rage provoked by infidelity?

 

[woodsroad]

Apologies for taking the thread in this direction and derailing. My main point was that a young man today with a smartphone will certainly see more naked bodies than the average young man throughout the ages. I don't think this can be argued.

Sure, people have been having sex (lots of it) all along, not all came to their wedding night a virgin, etc. All said, I disagree that humans are not monogamous by nature. What else explains the particular type of jealousy and rage provoked by infidelity?

Feeling outraged that your partner cheated on you is not mutually exclusive with engaging in the same behavior. The "victim" may well be guilty of similar behavior.

Either way, close to 50% of adults do not maintain monogamous relationships, the US divorce rate is close to 50%, 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife and the US marriage rate has plummeted to an all-time low.

 

[Sam Gamgee]

Feeling outraged that your partner cheated on you is not mutually exclusive with engaging in the same behavior. The "victim" may well be guilty of similar behavior.

Either way, close to 50% of adults do not maintain monogamous relationships, the US divorce rate is close to 50%, 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife and the US marriage rate has plummeted to an all-time low.

Not sure where you got those stats, but you spoke of human nature, and jealousy is innate in human nature, which presupposes infidelity being a violation of it.

 

[woodsroad]

The puzzle of monogamous marriage - PMC

The anthropological record indicates that approximately 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife (polygynous marriage), and both empirical and evolutionary considerations suggest that large absolute differences in ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Divorce Statistics and Facts | What Affects Divorce Rates in the U.S.?

We found every divorce statistic, study and fact you need to know - over 115 in all. Find out what impacts divorce (spoiler: almost everything).

www.wf-lawyers.com

USA - Marriage rate 2022 | Statista

In 2022, the marriage rate in the United States stood at 6.2 per 1,000 people of the population.

www.statista.com

 

[Sam Gamgee]

Thanks for that. But again, you spoke to human nature and I was merely pointing out that the argument didn't follow the evidence. Feel free to have the last word.

The puzzle of monogamous marriage - PMC

The anthropological record indicates that approximately 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife (polygynous marriage), and both empirical and evolutionary considerations suggest that large absolute differences in ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Divorce Statistics and Facts | What Affects Divorce Rates in the U.S.?

We found every divorce statistic, study and fact you need to know - over 115 in all. Find out what impacts divorce (spoiler: almost everything).

www.wf-lawyers.com

USA - Marriage rate 2022 | Statista

In 2022, the marriage rate in the United States stood at 6.2 per 1,000 people of the population.

www.statista.com

 

[ThermionicScott]

Apologies for taking the thread in this direction and derailing. My main point was that a young man today with a smartphone will certainly see more naked bodies than the average young man throughout the ages. I don't think this can be argued.

Before human beings invented clothes, they saw everyone naked. In my one trip to a nude beach years ago, it was fascinating how quickly it became no big deal to see other people naked.

Nudity is titillating because we've made it taboo.

 

[woodsroad]

Thanks for that. But again, you spoke to human nature and I was merely pointing out that the argument didn't follow the evidence. Feel free to have the last word.

Our very actions as a species proves that humans, by nature, are not monogamous. Many people have the desire and discipline to remain monogamous, but that doesn't negate the reality.

Exhibiting "the particular type of jealousy and rage provoked by infidelity" also does not negate my argument. Humans are also homicidal by nature (We've been killing each other in large numbers since the beginning of time) and yet we rightfully exhibit rage when it happens. Being compassionate is also an innate human trait.

I'm not seeking to have the last word, just continuing the conversation.

 

[TheIronMonkey]

Every once in a while, somebody here posts about the ideal of tobacco exclusivity.

I get it. Many of us hold in our minds the image of some old timer, remembered endearingly for always smoking a particular tobacco. There's a certain nostalgia attached to this image, and a certain regret (in some of us) that we'll never be that guy.

Now I know that many of you don't share this nostalgia. "Variety is the spice of life" has been your motto, and you've never felt wistfulness in this direction. That's fine.

But for my part, I have sometimes felt this wistfulness. I've wished that I represented something simpler and more rooted -- less influenced by the consumptive mode of a luxurious society.

But I'm re-thinking that (on this point), and here are three reasons --

(1) Like so many other things that we wax nostalgic about, the historic reality had everything to do with real-world limitations. There weren't many tobaccos available, and a guy picked the one he liked best. If we chose to impose limitations on ourselves (which of course could be a healthy spiritual discipline), we'd be doing something different than the historical reality we're talking about.

(2) What else do we feel this way about?
"Old Uncle Ernie only ever ate hot dogs. Literally. Breakfast, lunch, and dinner, for 80 years -- nothing besides hot dogs ever passed his lips. What a rooted fellow. Those were the good-ol'-days when a man was content with one thing."
No, that would be weird.
We don't feel this way about food or drink or anything else -- why tobacco?

(3) Nostalgia attaches to an image, and it's surprising how quickly and easily it shifts when the image shifts. The hipster wants tweed and a carefully waxed mustache on Monday, but he wants plaid flannel and an unkempt beard on Tuesday, because the period-from-which-he-feels-alienated-du-jour has shifted. Likewise, if we think of 1950s grandpa smoking that one tobacco from that one Dr. Grabow, we wonder whether we should settle down to one tobacco, too. But think instead of hobbits. Do you imagine that most hobbits are rigid loyalists to Longbottom Leaf or Old Toby or Southern Star, exclusively? No. Hobbits are fond of nice things, and of variety in colorful waistcoats, and of smorgasbords at parties, etc. I imagine that their eyes might grow wide in wonder and delight at the variety in our tobacco cellars!

When I was in high school, my best friend (at the time) and I talked about something we called “the feeling”—it was essentially “nostalgia,” or “longing.” There is a romantic charm to that ache you feel for something that may (or may not) have happened years ago—your heart aches for that romantic memory and feeds off of the impossibility of ever being able to capture it. It’s an odd sensation that feels good, yet sad at the same time, created by never being able to touch what you’re grasping at—it’s kind of a Catch-22.

I do think people often build up a romanticized perception of how things used to be and don’t consider the contemporary circumstances that may have existed at the time as you have. Others have lived through the period in question and may in fact prefer the days of past.

I personally enjoy all the options and variety of pipe and cigar blends available today, and am not intentionally zeroing in on a singular blend (not to say I don’t have favourites). When I was heavily into cigars in the early ’90s, new companies were popping up left and right and you couldn’t keep track of them. Few survived, but, there have been ones that have stood the test of time and become staples in the industry, and there are new brands appearing all the time. It’s a good time for tobacco in many ways, apart from the obvious restrictions we face.

 

[brian64]

@Sam Gamgee @woodsroad

You are both correct. Human nature is filled with contradictions and complexities. Humans are irrational, inexplicable creatures, and they are all very different while simultaneously having many traits in common.

When it comes to monogamy, it comes more naturally to some than to others. Some are much more deeply affected by intimacy than others, and cannot cope well with multiple relationships. And some whose moral code requires monogamy may break it anyway...and some who have no such belief may be monogamous anyway.

 

[coys]

I predict this thread will be locked soon so I will just say, interesting discussion on our reasons for choosing the things we do for our pipes!

 

[briarfoxx]

Being as what you posit is primarily a theological response, and I have no experience in the I’ve only ever seen my wife naked arena, I’ll just leave it as “people love to f~<k strangers”

Actually, all his points on human nature are governed by common secular law and he used the legal terms of each that cover them.

He didn’t mention adultery—also a legal term—but that is illegal by secular law in many places as well, and anywhere it’s not will still cost you dearly in the divorce proceedings.

 

[briarfoxx]

Our very actions as a species proves that humans, by nature, are not monogamous. Many people have the desire and discipline to remain monogamous, but that doesn't negate the reality.

Exhibiting "the particular type of jealousy and rage provoked by infidelity" also does not negate my argument. Humans are also homicidal by nature (We've been killing each other in large numbers since the beginning of time) and yet we rightfully exhibit rage when it happens. Being compassionate is also an innate human trait.

I'm not seeking to have the last word, just continuing the conversation.

If humans are both homicidal by nature and non-monogamous by nature, the only logical extensions to that are that either homicide is acceptable because it’s part of human nature, or that human nature is not automatically an appropriate measure of what is acceptable. In which case, it’s not a very good argument against the adherence to monogamy.

 

[woodsroad]

If humans are both homicidal by nature and non-monogamous by nature, the only logical extensions to that are that either homicide is acceptable because it’s part of human nature, or that human nature is not automatically an appropriate measure of what is acceptable. In which case, it’s not a very good argument against the adherence to monogamy.

Correct.
Simply because someone has a capability, doesn’t mean that that it’s ok to whip it out. That’s what religion and society are all about.

 

[Servant King]

Very interesting thread, and very interesting responses.

To add my two cents (and to repeat my own story that I've told on here more times than I can call to mind), I started out as a one-tin-at-a-time type pipe smoker, but when I saw a large "insta-cellar" lot for sale (about a year and a half into it), I felt I had to snag it. The lot was pretty varied, maybe a 70/30 split of aromatics to non, but the variety allowed me to sample blends all over the spectrum, and find out what I love, what I dislike, and everything in between. I'm grateful for the opportunity to do that on the cheap; plus, it gave me a nice head start on cellaring.

So, in short, it's almost as though the decision was made for me. But if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't do anything different. As it stands right now, I have about three dozen active blends in jars, and about the same number of sealed tins. Occasionally, just occasionally, I feel slightly overwhelmed by the options at hand. By and large, however, I am quite content with my cellar as it is, and I only seek to augment it here and there when I find bargains.

I honestly don't think I could ever be a one-blend pipe smoker. The fewest I could ever see in my future rotation would be six to eight blends.