Does pair bonding impact men too?

Pontifex_Lucious-II · 2019-08-27T11:02:24+00:00

Oxytocin manufactures in men as well

Blonsomio · 2019-08-27T10:45:46+00:00

Promiscuous people of both genders tend to cheat more.

wtknight · 2019-08-27T12:16:59+00:00

It should be, but women often choose high N men anyway because they are usually high value men. Male aversion to female high N is due to an ancestral fear of cuckolding, which involves a man devoting all of his resources to a child who is not his. The most women have to fear is men devoting just some of their resources to a bastard child, and traditionally men did not provide for their bastards, and the high value of this man’s genes outweighed any of these concerns in a woman’s mind.

SparrowInAHurricane · 2019-08-27T12:09:41+00:00

I think any time you over indulge in anything, it becomes significantly less important. A man who sleeps with lots of women will have a diminished ability to pair bond and eventually loose enthusiasm of the newness each encounter can offer. Men may not get tired of the primitive biological function of sex but multiple partners will make anything more meaningful harder to obtain.

reluctantly_red · 2019-08-27T15:21:16+00:00

Guys can fuck 30 or 40 meh women and then fall madly in love when a woman they connect with crosses their path.

sublimemongrel · 2019-08-27T12:48:48+00:00

Red pillers extrapolate their "pair bonding" rhetoric from data like this. You will note that the blog says data on men is lacking. You will also note that it says nothing about "pair bonding" at all.

However, I have seen some data points such as this and this which tend to show gender isn't relevant or it's actually more relevant in men.

The last study I saw found the latter: https://news.fsu.edu/news/education-society/2018/02/12/lead-us-not-temptation-predictors-infidelity-divorce-highlighted-new-fsu-research/

However, again, none of this is specifically about "pair bonding". If you look at actual pair bonding studies, a lot of it has to do with prairie voles. And, IIRC, there was a finding that male prairie voles have adapted to diminish their pair bonding mechanism when they are away from their partner for a certain period of time, whereas the same was not seen in female prairie voles. Which would make sense evolutionary speaking since he will need to find a new mate in order to reproduce. I could be misremembering some of that though, I will have to see if I can dig up that study.

reluctantly_red · 2019-08-27T14:16:57+00:00

Yes, men can and usually pair bond.

'Oneitis' is a testament to it. It is a part of a man's development cycle.

Debatably they have equal or higher propensity for it than women, as contrary to women, most men don't have much alternative, and accept the simplest alternative. Men have a more minimalistic(?) kind of view

The red pill / and or science talks a lot about pair bonding impacting women and that this is why men typically don’t want to be with a woman who’s been with many men.

It is more of a instinctual reaction, just like how men are attracted to sacks of fat (i.e. Butts and Breasts). It makes no sense, yet we are because of instinct. Likewise, men do not like high n count women.

Sure, there is the pairbonding thing. But there is also the instinctual part of it too. Men just cannot deal well with this behavior pattern. Just like how men cannot deal with women without these "sacks of fat".

What about men who have been with plenty women? Would their ability to pair bond diminish too?

They also have difficulty pain bonding. Obviously.

Why is this ignored?

It isn't ignored, nor by women or men, however men usually think about such things before proposing a LTR, women not so much. They tend to feel, and not care about their partner possible behavior pattern. A man will analyze the possibilities before hand. (and if sexual desire permit him to)

Also, many men work hard to get as many women as they can because of the hormonal frenzy that is the male puberty, after some decades it decreases, A LOT. I couldn't care less about having many women as I get closer to my 30's.

PostModernCommie · 2019-08-27T14:25:16+00:00

Brah, the red pill interpretation of pair bonding in humans is pure bro-psychology used to slut shame and repress women based on their sexual behavior.

goatismycopilot · 2019-08-27T13:36:55+00:00

High N men tend not to do well with monogamy unless the monogamy is temporary. They fall into three categories: try marriage on for size because they want kids then realize hey man this is not for me then go back to their former lifestyle. These are the kind of guys who when they have daddy time bring a different GF every time because they need to shoehorn kid and chick time or cut down on daddy time because it gets in the way of chick time. Then there is the get married a couple different times have different sets of kids always end up divorced guys. They always find a way to blame the women and frame their failures as virtues, oh I was too nice and forgiving, I was too romantic whatever, never I am bad at marriage or I have poor judgement. There is the guy who stays married for a 100 years but cheats the whole time, they either have money so their wife is like hell no on divorced I want this lifestyle or they pick some damaged woman who is super religious or or lacking in some essential ingredient who tolerates it. Then there is actually a fourth kind who is hella ladies man his whole life and then gets married at 70 has a kid, dies and the kid never really knows who they are.

J_Milton_Jr · 2019-08-27T10:37:03+00:00

and that this is why men typically don’t want to be with a woman who’s been with many men

Idk man, I doubt that " promiscuous womens diminishing ability to pairbond " is the reason why most men do not want promiscuous women

Situation 1: (One man & 100 women) One man can impregnate hundreds of women easily

Situation 2: (One woman & 100 men) Several men can only impregnate one woman

So from the point of view of species conservation, it makes sense that men are more promiscuous than women

It makes sense that, for a number of reasons , it was not appreciated when women are too promiscuous.

biolgical reasons women take over the lion's share of the education of the child, especially in the first years. Instincts like the man's would be disadvantageous for the breeding and upbringing of offspring. However, to ensure that there is enough offspring, it is necessary that men want to have sex more often

sociological reasons In the past, men never knew for sure if the children were their own so a promiscuous woman reduces the possibility of reciting one's own genes ; women could not risk being impregnated by a man who can not take care of them ...

diffdedbed · 2019-08-27T15:16:14+00:00

The weird insult of....

"You'll marry the first girl you lay" (Someone actually used that on me in 8th grade which I think was a line in Ferris Bueller's Day Off and made me think less of him for it since it was like "you used a movie line?" ) I think doesn't really take into account that its probably kinda normal to do so.

I fell hard for my first girlfriend, I probably would have married her, it would have been a horrible mistake, but those love NRE chemicals took over.

With multiple partners, I think people start to control those emotions better, men and women, which yea does lower pair bonding but also allows for more logical thinking.

So as a 19 year old who first got laid I was far more likely to fall for the woman than I would as a jaded 50+n count guy in his 40's. Where a pretty face and a willingness to let me stick it in her was just great, its now a "well and what else do you have?".

Where I think TRP takes it, is only from a guys perspective, which isn't wrong just one sided. A woman with a high n count isn't going to be mesmerized by your dick, shes over that, but a guy isn't going to be taken in either after a higher N count.

(Side note I married the 2nd girl I laid, no ragrets, guy who insulted me? Had an arranged marriage, he was Indian)

katymarx · 2019-08-27T16:19:24+00:00

Pair bonding style is often solidified in child hood, related to attachment style.

blackedoutfast · 2019-08-27T18:36:18+00:00

yes it affects men but not in the same way. men are more polygynous by nature. it's harder for women to separate sex from love and by the time they've fucked enough random dudes that they can have sex without feeling anything, that becomes the default mode for them.

[deleted] · 2019-08-27T20:32:29+00:00

wouldn't be surprised that it is

datingapppro · 2019-08-27T13:43:36+00:00

Having an emotional connection, real or perceived, with a woman and then getting heart broken is probably the similar example as sex for women. Men can have sex no strings attached much easier.

But man when you go through enough breakups you just don’t give a shit anymore

rivertorain____ · 2019-08-27T10:37:02+00:00

TRP's "pair bonding" is not at all supported by science - neither in humans nor in animals.

What is supported is that everyone has a different sociosexual orientation, which predisposes them to varying attitudes (and restrictions) towards sex. On average, men are less restricted than women, which means they are less "bonded" by the TRP definition.

People high in extraversion and openness are also less restricted, as are people with insecure attachment styles who show Dark Triad traits (again, higher in men on average).

People who have been with many partners are that way because they have an unrestricted sociosexual orientation. This doesn't mean they cannot commit or be loving and faithful partners; they usually just have less of a desire to.

Edit: No idea why this is being downvoted..

Criticalthinking346 · 2019-08-27T15:12:11+00:00

The “science” isn’t conclusive about women.

Emervila · 2019-08-27T15:14:01+00:00

What about men who have been with plenty women?

There's this wrong belief TRP does not talk about but it actually does. Chad and Tyrone never commit bc they can't pair bonding it has been always accepted that's why they are the ideal Alpha Fx the main focus in on women bc TRP is for helping men so there's no case on studying Chad

It's never been ignored those incapable to pair bond men are the alpha fux Chad and Tyrone.

TheBookOfSeil · 2019-08-27T15:28:03+00:00

Depends on how long this pair-bonding is for. Two months? Sure. Eight months? Probably. A year? Maybe. 3 years? That’s pushing it.

[deleted] · 2019-08-27T15:49:24+00:00

People are born/raised with various "grades" of pair bonding ability and then that can be further affected by their behavior/lifestyle as they get older.

That's how I see it.

sadomasochrist · 2019-08-27T16:25:23+00:00

Men being less able to pair bond is a benefit to the man and the woman in the relationship.

mistresswhat · 2019-08-27T16:30:46+00:00

No, but it doesn't affect women either.

mathematicmonkey · 2019-08-27T19:32:19+00:00

Absolutely yes. I read a a comment on reddit awhile back by a woman who said she didn’t like dating virgins because they catch feelings too quickly. Pairbonding truly is dying off, which in my opinion is very sad.

JustAnotherHandle_ · 2019-08-27T12:55:59+00:00

Women and men are different. Men are able to remove emotion part from sex and it becomes just release, like jacking off to porn.

analt223 · 2019-08-27T13:01:15+00:00

It does, but since men have to be initiators we dont get nearly as many opportunities, and (usually) have to seek it out.

The reason why it impacts women way more than men is because they are usually flooded with more opportunities to leave. Or at least 'flooded' compared to men and the ghost town it is for us

rus9384 · 2019-08-27T14:08:03+00:00

Would their ability to pair bond diminish too?

I am pretty sure it's the other way around: people who have lower ability to pair bond have more partners over time (assuming they can do that, of course, incels who can't pair bond exist).

That said, I think social programming effect (that makes promiscuous people dislike their limited ability to pair bond) can diminish over N counts. That's like... becoming the true self, I suppose. Or maybe like losing the approach anxiety over number of people you approached.

And yeah, I think it's true for both sexes.

AutoModerator · 2019-08-27T09:02:16+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Title	Does pair bonding impact men too?
Author	thisisme201
Upvotes	13
Comments	136
Date	August 27, 2019 9:02 AM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/cw1rel/does_pair_bonding_impact_men_too/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/does-pair-bonding-impact-men-too.254254 https://theredarchive.com/post/254254

Comments