Monogamy May Be Even More Difficult For Women Than it Is For Men

[MikeMcMann]

Not sure I buy the 'women want to go find another guy while the one she had sex with just went to sleep' angle, and instead women tend to bond emotionally, but either way I think you are missing an entire half of the equation, which is the point of mating to begin with, and that is children.

Monogamy provides a stable unit to raise children and raises the success of the child. Women want that stability and having a 'nesting' instinct also and look for a man that can offer that.

Human babies are helpless and need a lot of focus for quite a long time relative to animals.

Its not a overt want. It a subconscious or instinctual pull.

As i said prior, what nature does not want is for a fertile good gene woman to end up partnered with an impotent man and her being taken out of the pool. So it conspires to ensure she has the maximum chance to get pregnant with the best sperm.

And yes nature also wants the male to stick around and care for the child so luckily, going back not too long ago it was near impossible for her partner to know he was not the father and therefore she could still get that stable family.

 

[octopus]

Source?

https://www.economist.com/christmas-specials/2017/12/19/the-link-between-polygamy-and-war

 

[Greoric]

Was that a controversial statement?

 

[Greoric]

We are not designed to be monogamous sexually.

Different/New people giving you attention makes you feel good. shocker

Among the great apes, promiscuity is corollary to male testicle size, where Lowland Silverbacks have mincy little balls, and Chimpanzees are basically walking balls with brains. Humans are somewhere in the middle.

 

[Rod1]

People are looking too deep into it.

Males stop caring after getting married, thats a fact and women are more complicated to please.

Men are fine plowing the wife, cumming and going back to sleep, women need foreplay, romance and are not guaranteed to orgasm.

I realized that quick enough to save my marriage, i started taking care of myself, working out, taking her out and try to make her orgasm everytime we have sex even if she asks me to wrap things up (which is a red flag).

Dont be lazy.

 

[Greoric]

Humans went the other way quite often, and that's why we got smarter. The "alpha" was a big dumb idiot who wasn't very thoughtful.. Some human-like primate females liked screwing somebody besides the alpha. Women like generic diversity, and the system of 'only the alpha breeds" isn't very sexy in that it doesn't increase genetic diversity.

Women like males that were good talkers, or good at random things.. This grew our brains.

It's not quite that simple. They're not so much interested in diversity as much as they are of getting the best of everything. They're after the rich guy or the stable fatherly type, because he has the resources and/or dedication that will help rear her progeny, but she's also interested in the athlete, power lifter, or MMA fighter etc because she also wants their genetic contribution. Since the latter is often guaranteed to be more promiscuous, and won't be around when she's raising the kid, she has an interest in also locking down a mate that will be generous with his the time and resources at the same time.

Not sure I buy the 'women want to go find another guy while the one she had sex with just went to sleep' angle, and instead women tend to bond emotionally, but either way I think you are missing an entire half of the equation, which is the point of mating to begin with, and that is children.

Monogamy provides a stable unit to raise children and raises the success of the child. Women want that stability and having a 'nesting' instinct also and look for a man that can offer that.

Human babies are helpless and need a lot of focus for quite a long time relative to animals.

 

[octopus]

Good post

Not sure I buy the 'women want to go find another guy while the one she had sex with just went to sleep' angle

This is where he lost me as well... seemed like a college bang bro cuck fantasy worked its way in... I used to work on a farm(wake up when the sun comes up, go to sleep when the sun goes down type of lifestyle and there's no way primitive humans were staying up late at night to sneak around and fucc, I think gangbang sperm wars would probably be more likely if we want to run with that theory which could potentially explain why we like to watch porn and why others are into cuckolding.... on iliza eschlinger's most recent jre podcast she used some chick/bro science where she said something along the lines of, turning your back on a women meant you wanted her to die because you were refusing to share knowledge with her. First time she ever made me laugh.

 

[Greoric]

Good post

This is where he lost me as well... seemed like a college bang bro cuck fantasy worked its way in... I used to work on a farm(wake up when the sun comes up, go to sleep when the sun goes down type of lifestyle and there's no way primitive humans were staying up late at night to sneak around and fucc, I think gangbang sperm wars would probably be more likely if we want to run with that theory which could potentially explain why we like to watch porn and why others are into cuckolding.... on iliza eschlinger's most recent jre podcast she used some chick/bro science where she said something along the lines of, turning your back on a women meant you wanted her to die because you were refusing to share knowledge with her. First time she ever made me laugh.

Hunter gatherers weren't as active as when we started agricultural societies. The hunting and gathering only consisted of about 4 or so hours out of the day. Plenty of time for social posturing and hierarchy climbing for men and women in the community to sexually select their mates.

 

[Phr3121]

Monogamy may be even more difficult for women than it is for men. It’s a widely held belief that monogamy comes more naturally to women than it does to men.

I would question your source. Pretty much the female of any species is looking for a male that will support raising the offspring and provide. Sex is not an issue, only for procreation. The male of most species is looking to have sex as often as possible and increase the chance of its lineage to survive. That is why men are aroused visually and females are not. Men need to be 'turned on' to have an erection for the process to work. Females don't need that and are not built like that. Their priority is focused on the offspring.

 

[octopus]

Hunter gatherers weren't as active as when we started agricultural societies. The hunting and gathering only consisted of about 4 or so hours out of the day. Plenty of time for social posturing and hierarchy climbing for men and women in the community to sexually select their mates.

I stand corrected. Misapplied my own bro science and anecdotal evidence. Well said Mr. G

 

[Greoric]

I would question your source. Pretty much the female of any species is looking for a male that will support raising the offspring and provide. Sex is not an issue, only for procreation. The male of most species is looking to have sex as often as possible and increase the chance of its lineage to survive. That is why men are aroused visually and females are not. Men need to be 'turned on' to have an erection for the process to work. Females don't need that and are not built like that. Their priority is focused on the offspring.

Good post, and this is almost spot on. Women are certainly looking for the resource contribution like you mentioned. They are, however, still looking for the superior genetic contribution as well. That's why its so cliche to see the trophy wife of the CEO's kid looking so much like the wife's bodyguard.

 

[Greoric]

I stand corrected. Misapplied my own bro science and anecdotal evidence. Well said Mr. G

Funny enough, the couple of studies that produced the literature about the H/Gs 4 hour "work day" pretty much launched the anarcho-primitivist movement (think Tyler Durden "fight club" philosophy) under the premise that our whole system is fucked since we're still doing a 9-5 everyday despite all the technological advances.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Typical Muslim....

 

[Greoric]

I don't think anything you wrote there contradicts what I wrote.

Yes the mother needs a provider and care giver in a spouse and she will tend to PARTNER with that guy who is willing. But that does not mean that nature does not want her STILL to seek out the healthiest sperm as historically he would never know it was not his kid.

What nature does not want is for high value women to be impregnated or worse yet, end up with a low level guy who cannot impregnate her. It wants that competition and may the best sperm win, but the most caring spouse care for that child, his or not.

This man gets it @InternetHero

 

[InternetHero]

I don't think anything you wrote there contradicts what I wrote.

Yes the mother needs a provider and care giver in a spouse and she will tend to PARTNER with that guy who is willing. But that does not mean that nature does not want her STILL to seek out the healthiest sperm as historically he would never know it was not his kid.

What nature does not want is for high value women to be impregnated or worse yet, end up with a low level guy who cannot impregnate her. It wants that competition and may the best sperm win, but the most caring spouse care for that child, his or not.

I also said in my post that was a possibility, I also wrote many more important things, things I honestly think were not understood or passed over so you could "defend" the claims of a stranger.

Things about life, science, and how a study works/does not work.

More power to you, and be well.

 

[Bald1]

Funny enough, the couple of studies that produced the literature about the H/Gs 4 hour "work day" pretty much launched the anarcho-primitivist movement (think Tyler Durden "fight club" philosophy) under the premise that our whole system is fucked since we're still doing a 9-5 everyday despite all the technological advances.

Survival vs a game of Monopoly. Those of us who don't buy into the "he who dies with the most toys wins" line do actually think it's pure fuckery. Especially as much of the time spent busting our balls provides others with toys regardless of our own efforts.

 

[waiguoren]

@waiguoren

?

 

[InternetHero]

This man gets it @InternetHero

Are you sure, my friend?

My post was not about the study, it was about studies', about the media, and about the latest research in a diet fad or evolutionary tale, about an arm around a woman's shoulders being mate guarding.

What we think we "get" is often highly subjective, deceptive, and is part of a business and or entertainment when presented to the public.

That someone would get riled to "defend" an article they red, and not consider the complications of human thought, desire, and will. Scientific and evolutionary study in animals is fairly effective and predictable, as is the behavior.

In human beings, au contraire, it is one of many impulses, and you or I's impulse to decide the determination is often as related to - entertainment and the public.

 

[InternetHero]

Survival vs a game of Monopoly. Those of us who don't buy into the "he who dies with the most toys wins" do actually think it's pure fuckery. Especially as much of the time spent busting our balls provides others with toys regardless of our own efforts.

It is all so simple - become famous and hide from the fame, become rich and always want more wealth, have all the toys and discover they lose their amusements, have all the knowledge and find the knowledge raises more questions and burdens with weight, win all the games, every single one and at last wonder what was the point of playing?

Was it all in my mind, in all of the minds of the many running after what glitters around them?

"I have heard the key
Turn in the door once and turn once only
We think of the key, each in his prison
Thinking of the key, each confirms a prison." T.S. Eliot, from The Wasteland

Mr. Kurtz, he dead...

One might say.

Why did I listen to everyone who said "follow me" when they "walked behind?"

But then again, who else would I listen to, who would care.

 

[Greoric]

Are you sure, my friend?

My post was not about the study, it was about studies', about the media, and about the latest research in a diet fad or evolutionary tale, about an arm around a woman's shoulders being mate guarding.

What we think we "get" is often highly subjective, deceptive, and is part of a business and or entertainment when presented to the public.

That someone would get riled to "defend" an article they red, and not consider the complications of human thought, desire, and will. Scientific and evolutionary study in animals is fairly effective and predictable, as is the behavior.

In human beings, au contraire, it is one of many impulses, and you or I's impulse to decide the determination is often as related to - entertainment and the public.

No not sure. Just looking to spark the debate.