Romantic Jealousy: Causes, Symptoms, Cures (18 page)

The sociobiological approach helps focus attention on the different ways men and women express jealousy. When couples are told that other men and women experience jealousy conflicts in a similar way, they are vastly relieved. As a result, they are often able to confront their own and their mate's jealousy with more understanding and less blame.

Unlike the sociobiological focus on the differences between men and women in jealousy, the psychodynamic, the systems, and the behavioral approaches view sex differences as mostly irrelevant in treating jealousy. The psychodynamic approach recognizes that the childhood experiences of boys and girls are different, but the process of unearthing the unconscious trauma at the base of a jealousy problem is the same for men and for women. In the systems approach, though men and women may play different roles in a romantic relationship, the goal of disrupting negative interaction patterns does not depend on who plays what role. In the behavioral approach, it doesn't matter whether a man or a woman responds inappropriately to a jealousy trigger; the goal of therapy is to unlearn that inappropriate response and replace it with a more appropriate one.

The sociobiological approach has received a great deal of criticism for using circular reasoning and explanations that can never be empirically substantiated or refuted. It looks at existing phenomena, such as sex differences in jealousy, and argues that there must be an evolutionary reason for their existence. Sociobiologists are convinced that if there were no evolutionary reason for the survival of a certain trait, it would not have existed today. But proving a phenomenon by its existence is not a valid proof.

Another criticism has been directed at sociobiologists' attempts to link human jealousy to animal jealousy-both supposedly a result of genetic programming. In fact, critics argue that there is no empirical research that directly links jealousy with a particular gene. 17

Furthermore, the sociobiological notion that jealousy is "natural" and reflects some kind of biological imperative is dangerous. It can justify unacceptable responses to jealousy, such as violence. There is a long tradition of tolerance toward men who kill their lovers and rivals because of' the belief that these men cannot help themselves. This biological imperative is far less likely to be evoked in defense of jealous women)

The notion that men and women are genetically "wired" to respond to jealousy in particular ways can also be used as an excuse not to work on a jealousy problem.

Integrating the Sociobiological and Power Perspectives

After reviewing the two explanations for sex differences in jealousy-the evolutionary and the power perspectives-one may be left wondering which explanation is the "correct" one. Are gender differences in jealousy the result of evolutionary or social forces? Scholars in each of these fields believe that they have the only possible answer to this (Iuestion. It is possible, however, to integrate the two perspectives. Jealousy is a result of an interaction between evolutionary forces and current social forces. It is also the result of processes in the mind of the jealous individual and of destructive patterns within the couple relationship. Jealousy is best described as a circle within a circle within a circle. The first circle is the individual. The second is the couple The third is the culture in which the couple lives. It is experienced by the individual, played out in the couple relationship, and shaped by evolution and social forces. Now we can move on to examine the social forces that define how jealousy is experienced and expressed.

A Note for Therapists

Evolutionary theory can provide a powerful educational tool in the context of therapy by helping to break the fallacy of uniqueness-the false assumption that every jealousy problem is unique. One of the workshop exercises I use to illustrate this point is a "jealousy socio- drania."

I start by drawing an imaginary line across the room. On one end is the position that an intimate relationship has to he monogamous: "You can't truly love more than one person. Jealousy is normal and natural when your mate shows an interest in another person." On the other end is the position that loving more than one person is not only possible, but also natural: 'Jealousy is not natural, but learned, and thus can be unlearned. If you truly' love someone, you want to see him or her happy, even when it is with someone else." I ask two volunteers from the group to argue for each of these two extreme positions. After that I invite the rest of the group to join in and find a spot that fits each of their positions along the continuum.

What inevitably happens is similar to what happened to Ron and Carol in the role play described earlier. Most of the women in the group cluster around the "monogamy" side of the jealousy line, while most men cluster around the "love should be free" side-dcmon- strating the basic sociobiological argument. When couples discover that their conflict about jealousy is shared by most other men and women, and that it actually makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, they are able to stop blaming each other, stop feeling guilty, and devote their energy to coping.

 
6

Romantic Jealousy
in Different Cultures

From the moment of his birth, the customs into which Ian individuall is born shape his experience and behavior. By the time he can talk, he is the tilde creator(' of his culture.

-Ruth Benedict, "Patterns of Cullure"

lealonsy Ihasi a human face.

-William Blake, Songs of tivperienee

A comparison of the ways people in different cultures experience and express jealousy shows that social forces exert it major influence on people's responses to it.t A situation that provokes jealousy in one culture at a particular time in history does not necessarily provoke jealousy in another culture or time. A response considered normal and acceptable in one culture may be considered abnormal and unacceptable in another. The comforting conclusion is that everything one has clone or imagined doing, no matter how strange one's own culture would consider it, is probably normal somewhere else. The subject in this chapter is the social-psychological approach, which views jealousy as a social phenomenon rooted in the culture in which we live.

Let us start with an example of the ways men in different cultures respond to being cuckolded. A turn-of-the-century Bakongo African husband who discovered that his wife had an affair demanded it large sum of money from her lover.2 A Samoan husband cut out the eyes of the lover or bit off his nose and ears.' A "liberated" American husband, living at the end of the twentieth century, has been taught that jealousy is evidence of low self-esteem and tries hard to overcome it.4

Can you imagine a situation in which a newlywed bridegroom would actually ask another man to have sexual intercourse with his bride? This, too, happened at times among the Bakongo. Upon completion of the marriage ceremony, it was customary for the village elders to enter the house of the newlywed couple to make sure that everything was in order and, most important, that the bridegroom was able to consummate the marriage. If he was unable to do it, the marriage was dissolved. Sometimes, to avoid shame and humiliation, an impotent husband would find a suitable young man and permit him to have sex with his wife. If a child was born out of their union, the husband treated it as his own. A similar custom was practiced by the Plateau tribes of northern Zimbabwe. A sterile or impotent husband would at times ask his brother to have sex in secret with his wife, so the couple could have a child.' Similar choices are being made today in our modern Western society; infertile women have eggs donated by their sisters or mothers rather than have a surrogate ovum donor.

According to cross-cultural psychologist Ralph Hupka, cultures affect our response to jealousy in two primary ways:

1. By defining or not defining a particular event as a threat, which includes (a) designating the events that make us jealous; (b) specifying when are we allowed to perceive a threat; and (c) creating the conditions that dispose us to jealousy.

2. By giving us certain options for responding when an event is defined as a threat.('

Events That Make Us Jealous

The culture defines for people the events that will make them perceive a threat to their marriage. These events vary widely, and don't always include an interloper having sex with their mate. For example, a husband among the Yurok tribe of California or the Pawnee of the American plains saw another man's request for a cup of water from his wife as a clear signal that the other man was after her.7

An Eskimo husband, on the other hand, offered his wife to a guest in a ceremony of "putting out the lamp" A good host was expected, after turning out the lamp at night, to invite the guest to have sexual intercourse with his wife. A husband who did not give his wife to his guest was considered stingy, mean, and inhospitable. Therefore, a husband upbraided his wife if she was slow to respond to the guest. Yet the same husband would become intensely jealous if his wife had sexual intercourse with that same guest in circumstances other than the lamp ceremony. An Eskimo husband could even kill such an interloper.8

The examples of the Yurok and the Eskimo demonstrate that the culture, more than the individual, determines when it is appropriate to perceive a threat to the marriage. Anthropologist Margaret Mead describes another example of this in the marriage customs of the Banaro of New Guinea. These customs are full of occasions that in modern Western culture would give rise to tremendous jealousy.9

A young Banaro man who eloped with the woman lie loved did not approach her sexually (luring the elopement. Instead of submitting to their mutual passion, he brought her, a virgin, to his father's house where he knew she would be submitted to a cruel public defloration ceremony. Then the young bridegroom had to allow another man to enjoy his wife sexually for a whole year after their marriage, before lie himself could approach her.

Each Banaro man had a ceremonial friend. It was the duty of this friend to initiate his friend's son's future wife into sex. This was done very formally in the "Goblin Ilouse," in front of the sacred pipes upon which no woman was allowed to look. After the ceremony the young bride was returned to her father-in-law's care. The ceremonial friend had sex with her, always ritually, until a child was born. The child was known as the "goblin child." Only then was the husband allowed to take his wife.

Meanwhile, the young bridegroom was initialed sexually by the wife of his father's ceremonial friend. The initiation started with the young man being sent to look for the older woman in the forest. Later, on ceremonial occasions, the young bridegroom and his ceremonial friend would exchange wives. Their wives could even bear children to their husband's friends, instead of their husbands. Clearly, what would be an obvious jealousy' trigger for us had a different meaning for the Banaro.

When Are We Allowed to Perceive a Threat?

Cultures vary widely in what is considered acceptable evidence for people to conclude that there is a serious threat to their marriage. The Saora of India required the husband to see his wife in the act of' sexual intercourse with her lover before he could accuse her of adul- tery.10 For the Dobu of equatorial Africa, personal suspicion was legitimate enough cause to make an individual perceive a threat to the marriage.] ] Among the Plateau tribes of northern Zimbabwe, the proof of the wife's infidelity was the birth of a stillborn child or her own death in childbirth. The woman who lay (lying or mourning the death of her baby was asked to name her lover, whether or not she actually had one. The man she named was considered guilty without a need for further proof.]'

In chapter two, I mentioned that for the 728 Americans I questioned, the most serious perceived threat was a sexual liaison their mate had with someone else.13 A Zuni wife, on the other hand, did not perceive her husband's sexual liaisons as a threat to her marriage; instead, it was the gossip of the village people about her husband that caused her to perceive a threat and confront him.14

Another example of what in our culture would be considered a legitimate reason for jealousy can be found in polygamous societies. In such societies, marrying several women is the rule for rich and influential men, and women don't perceive their husbands' marriage to other women as a threat.]

Actually, it seems that when a woman is the first wife, she may even favor this arrangement for the help with household chores, female friendship, and prestige that it provides for her husband and for herself. Margaret Mead describes a case of a woman in a polygamous culture who hauled her husband into court on the charge that she had been married to him three years and borne him two children, yet he had not taken another wife. The native court allowed the husband six months in which to take a second wife. A second wife would add to this woman's prestige by conferring upon her the rank of "first wife." In addition, the second wife would provide the household with another laborer and childbearer. Because the addition of other women to the household enhanced the first wife's status and self-esteem there was no occasion for jealousy-unless one of those secondary wives became the favorite. The usurpation of the first wife's dignities provided both the occasion and the justification for jealousy.'6