What causes a Man to want more than one woman? Once this question is genuinely asked and answered by us as Men we will see that what we want stems from some form of Imbalance. We will also see that what we want and need isn’t in harmony, a Man doesn’t need more than one Woman and his body wasn’t designed to have multiple women although most(not all) want more than one. ~Lionheart

Not to judge, but its the same motivation why man wants 10 million that already have 5. Or why man wants five cars when they already have 3. I think it is a security blanket to have more options to increase the odds of always having 'just the right' one when they want it.

Greed.

Human beings are animals first. As in the definition of animal not in the slang sense.

Animal:
a living organism that feeds on organic matter, typically having specialized sense organs and nervous system and able to respond rapidly to stimuli.

As animals we are 'programmed' to reproduce because we are not immortal.
Our reproduction pro-generates our DNA in our offspring.
Each time we reproduce the DNA from the male and female are combined in what is called a zygote.

There is a difference in the physiology of males and females as in one has eggs and one has sperm.
The female produces the eggs and can only produce a limited number of eggs in her lifetime and for only a portion of her lifetime where the male produces not only millions of sperm but can produce sperm throughout his lifetime.

A Woman (the female human animal that can produce eggs), having a limited number of chances to reproduce her genetic code is more selective in her choices of where she obtains the sperm she needs to produce healthy offspring.
The Man (the male human animal that can produce sperm), produces millions of chances to reproduce. Most of the sperm dies without creating a reproductive event. The selection process is governed by saturation instead of selection.

Society tries to change the natural breeding of the human animal.
The reason why men are more prone to mess around on a woman is because it is their nature to do so.
Monogamy is not natural for most of the animal world, it does occur, usually with the higher intelligent animals. It is a personal over-ride to natural instinct that some people cannot control.

Having control over our animal instincts is rewarded.
Animalistic behavior is shunned.
Monogamy is proof that human beings have surpassed their animal instincts in favor of a directed behavior based on decision and choice.

The human soul naturally craves novelty and variety. It's exciting. We are programmed by society to be monogamous for different reasons, one is to control the world's human overpopulation. Sadly, monogamy is not natural in men. Monogamy is more so in women because we need to be selective since our egg production is limited.

Ask a million people and you get a million opinions...

Since I am a woman! I'm not sure why! But my guess would be, some men have uncontrollable Lust and they act on that.

Many men can control what they act on, even though they have the thoughts.
Those men can be satisfied by One woman.

We enjoy different sandwiches. Why do you think m and m's are different colors.

Sometimes they're looking for another one when they're unhappy or when they can't get the satisfaction that they want...

need and want are two very different concepts ..
society and religion may groom a man to believe he needs one woman ..
the hormones that exert their effect on his sexuality have some influence over what he wants .

vapors of her biological makeup
All that other scientific stuff aside. At one point are we referring to essence/vapors of a woman?
Love potion#?

Like Tom said: ask a million people you will get a million answers. My answer is they are appealing in many colors.

I have once heard that men are born to pro create and be prolific and as such that is their nature

I think women are attracted to the MAN, but men are attracted to FEMININITY so any good looking babe will do and then he moves on to the next "lucky girl". Women want security in case of pregnancy, but men want a maximum chance to make someone pregnant. So men want as many women as possible because they are attracted to their femininity, not necessarily the babe herself.

Please say that aint true well at least sometimes?

They say Sailors have a girl in every port, but it aint true, they never get to visit every port.

Yup, especially on this.

Here's mine: I don't buy the "men are driven by hormones to chase lots of women and women are driven by protection of eggs to find one man" garbage. It sounded logical when I was a kid, but then I gradually noticed that each person who claimed stuff like that, were doing it either to promote their own agenda, or just trying to make themselves feel okay about whatever mes the world around them was in.

For myself, I eventually realized that there's actually a whole cluster of things going on in me about this whole "want to have sex with a woman" stuff. Yeah, MAYBE there's a procreation/spread the genes thing, but that's a hell of a lot smaller motivation than personal comfort, and social status.

The people I've known, male and female alike, who wanted multiple mates, were all very similar in that they just wanted lots of personal fun. Yeah, some of them would come up with esoteric explanations for it, and would "borrow" whatever faddish "scientific" explanations were lying around, but in the end, all there ever was to it, was their own personal fun and comfort.

In younger age groups especially, the idea that having sex with multiple people as a form of CONQUEST is fairly common. When I was in college, I knew both males and females who played that exact game.

Heck, even part of the "Monogamy Club," is only there, because they want to feel they are smarter and more important than other people. They aren't really calling for monogamy for the reasons they claim, it's just an ego game for THEM.

For myself, I've discovered that I am sexually attracted to pretty much any fairly friendly and intelligent emotionally mature female on the planet. And on some level, I'd like very much to have sex with all of them, just so that I would feel cared about and valuable as a human being.

But for practical as well as emotional reasons, I am looking for a monogamous situation with a truly committed mate. Not because I think monogamy is "all that," or because I've given up the chase due to age, I just always really wanted ONE mate to live out a life with, as a thing to do.

But if a set of two or more women showed up who seemed to love me, and said "It's all of us or nothing, dude!" I think I'd go that way too.

This is am ancient law, out of date, unless you live in rural Ireland, where they still believe in that 'be fruitful and multiply' sort of thing

You're all over the place with your feelings because you can't even make up your mind what you want and then you knock other people's points as invalid "garbage". You are contradicting yourself and inconsistent.

Sociology, biology, psychology, anthropology, some combination.
Depends on what he wants more than one woman for.

Some people use others as trophies. As extensions of their ego, or as social camouflage in a pecking order.

And anymore people have so little experience with diverse relationship hierarchy's, maybe they only really interact via impersonal means a la facebook, their phone/computer/tablet, it's possible they try to use all relationships for their most obvious emotional impulses.


Everything stems from "imbalance."


It never is.
Harmony is a mentally masturbated hippie concept that has very little to do with navigating reality. Nothing really lives in harmony if you look at it on a long enough timeline.

All the idea of harmony highlights is that people don't really like change, and in most cases really don't want to take responsibility.


Anymore man doesn't "need" a woman at all, maybe depending on what context you're using to define "need."


Not really true.
Men and women's body's were "designed" to accommodate multiple partners and different types of complex relationships.

"Monogamy" is only really "designed" to last about 4-7 years.
Long enough to raise a kid to be somewhat self sufficient in basic survival within a group/herd.

What mans body was "designed" in many ways for was to try and guarantee any baby that came out of a woman was his.
Preejaculate helps kill off any other mans sperm in the vaginal canal, heightened aggression mixed with heightened jealousy and ownership feelings, competition among other men to determine primacy and inherent threat which inhibits "cuckolding."

A womans vagina stretches to accommodate multiple sizes, positions, conditions. It lubricates itself, allows for multiple orgasms, there's no real "spent" or time needed to "recharge" like men do after ejaculation.

Men are "designed" to try and get as many people as possible pregnant.
Women are "designed" to accommodate as many other people as possible to guarantee impregnation.

But that's not all they are "designed" to do.
They are also "designed" to be reliant upon the herd, "designed" to survive.


In a sense that's true.
But it's like saying "babies are born ignorant, as such that's their nature," and then having a discussion on why there are so many stupid people.

Nearly all human tendencies have two basic structures; Natural and Unnatural.
Human beings are socialized animals that reason.

The concept of monogamy is a social reasoning.
The concept of war is a social reasoning.
The concept of religion is a social reasoning.

Monogamy is a choice adopted by human beings for many different reasonings.
Right now, in many societies it is the current social consensus.
However, it is not a species wide consensus and may not be an individual reasoning.
There are still societies that do not embrace the social consensus of monogamy.
There are still individuals that do not embrace monogamy.

I once read a science fiction book (don't recall the title) that depicted a human settlement world where monogamy did not exist at all. Reproduction was accomplished as a matter of necessity and neither gender placed significance on the act. The book explored the absence of sexually driven sociology. It was interesting to read how the author expressed the influences of the reproduction process devoid of personal morality and religious conditioning.
With sexual preference no longer driving society, sex was just a natural act, much like eating or sleeping. It was the woman's duty to the settlement to get pregnant, rear the children and maintain the site.

This made me think of a Caveman Bob scenario.
The author was describing early man's primitive incentives.
Before religion and society started influencing behavior with socialized morals and values.
Monogamy is a social influence that causes civilization.
As time creeps forward, civilized behavior is changing to a personal view.
Men and women willingly adopt monogamy as an indication of civilization.
Monogamy is now a choice that becomes an imperative as a defining quality of being civilized.
However, not everyone makes the same choice.

There are a lot of science fiction works and a few science theories that suggest that as civilization advances, human beings will override savage animalistic impulses in favor of social reasoning.
There could come a time where reproduction is no longer a physical need.
Offspring will be engineered and grown outside the body.
In Woody Allen's Sleeper (1973), Sex is accomplished in what they called an Orgasmatron.
Other works of fiction depict anything from a virtual sex tank to a pill you take.
In such scenarios, monogamy is supplanted by companionship because compatibility is no longer based on replication of genetic code.
If society no longer values monogamy, all the 'uncivilized' behavior associated with monogamy are removed from the equation.

Personally, I prefer monogamous relationships.
There are a lot of people who do not.
I don't 'step out' on my relationships because it is my choice. The urge to still exists but I control my natural urges because I am civilized.
I value personal dedication and commitment because it is my choice.

????
I was very specific. Not "all over the place." What did you fail to understand?