In this work, I feel Bersani makes bold, outrageous claims that defy conventionality and require the readers to really think about what her says in order to either agree or disagree. I felt that reading this paper, initially I was appalled and offended by his argument, but as I continued to read, I found his logic and evidence of certain claims convincing and I found myself reevaluating what I always assumed to be true and 'natural'. Bersani begins by stating directly his opinion as a fact that monogamy is "cognitively inconceivable and morally indefensible." I found this to be quite audacious and was rather taken aback. However, I really found it interesting how he then proceeded to talk about humanity's need and constant search for identity. I felt that because he backed his bold claims with something that was more on neutral grounds, his argument is more convincing. Like the example he used about the USSR and how communism stripped people of their identity and once it fell, people sought out other forms of identity such as institutionalized religion, social recognition and such. I agree with his statement about this very much because not only do I relate to it, but also having done research on people's search for identity, I found that identity is not found within, but among. However, I do not think that people limit their identity and also their sexuality to just what their group does. A person's sexuality extends beyond psychoanalysis and although Bersani acknowledges that, he doesn't necessarily abide by it throughout his discourse.

Bersani uses Freud's theories of the Oedipus complex to go into his argument that monogamy is impossible because humans are innately bisexual. He goes on to talk about the rivalry for affection as children and how that serves as an indicator for the capacity for love beyond the traditional monogamous views. However, a flaw I find in his argument is that he basis almost all of his arguments of Freud and psychologists the like. Psychology/psychoanalysis is not something where you can get solid evidence and make unquestionable claims. Therefore, I feel that because Bersani attempts to even invalidate the basis of monogamy, he would need something more than just the work of Freud. And going back to the Oedipus complex, Bersani agrees with Freud that the behaviors and inclinations of children during this phase act as a precursor for the child's sexuality and that homosexuality can be explained through this. However, I feel that although there are feelings of rivalry during this developmental phase, to argue that they are underlying, repressed precursors for the child's sexual inclinations is not necessarily true. A psychologist Robert Sternberg proposed the triangular theory of love which notes the different forms of love:

1. Intimacy– Which encompasses feelings of attachment, closeness, connectedness, and bondedness.
2. Passion– Which encompasses drives connected to both limerance and libido/sexual attraction.
3. Commitment– Which encompasses, in the short term, the decision to remain with another, and in the long term, the shared achievements and plans made with that other.

'The amount of love one experiences depends on the absolute strength of these three components, and the type of love one experiences depends on their strengths relative to each other.' Therefore, I strongly believe that this love and jealousy a child (a son or a daughter) has for the mother's love/ vice versa stems 98% of the time out of the desire for intimacy a child has. This familial love that a child intimately feels for his/her parents can be categorized as companionate love, where there is no form of sexual desire, but a platonic, strong love. This can be clearly seen in the picture of the triangular theory of love.