Jealousy: self-inflicted agony and ruin

Abstract

This chapter analyses the concept of jealousy (as different from envy) in romantic and sexual relationships. It demonstrates that jealousy is both logically and empirically untenable, as it is: (1) a self-contradictory emotion; (2) a self-destructive activity. As to (1) feelings of jealousy are incompatible with true care for the well-being and satisfaction of the loved partner. Logically, the notion of jealousy is self-defeating: it professes to be an expression of love while at the same time forbidding the loved one the freedom to act autonomously, thus killing the very notion of love. As to (2) nearly all empirical data point to the destructive effects to relationships of the feeling of jealousy, Shakespeare’s Othello being its archetypal expression and its scathing analysis. The astounding fact, however, is that in many (most?) cultures jealousy is seen as an expression of love, while in reality it is an emanation of possessive feeling void of affection for the person ‘loved’. A thorough cultural analysis, coupled to recently available DNA analyses, however, reveal a wholly different picture of extra-pair offspring, fully undermining the foundations upon which the notion of jealousy if based. Recent developments like ‘open relationships’ and ‘polyamory’ may be signs of overthrowing the contradictory and destructive aspects of jealousy. They presuppose, however, to undo deeply ingrained social attitudes accompanying love relationships.

Keywords:

• Jealousy
• evolution
• relations
• love
• patriarchy

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 I will further use the constellation of male jealousy, but the mirror image may apply as well. There are reasons, however, to suppose that sexual jealousy is more frequent (and more outspoken) in men.

2 The acronym WEIRD stands for: Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic.

3 The volume by Mayer and Vanderheiden (2021) is a further trove of studies highlighting the necessity to critically review our entrenched WEIRD concepts and categories.

4 The book is in Dutch, which may impede the distribution of its ideas, one reason why it deserves an English version.