I keep noticing that when men bring up “pair bonding,” they usually aren’t talking about how they bond with women. I also notice that the concept itself is largely dominated by male talking heads, particularly in manosphere circles. For the last decade+, it’s men who are the primary ones evoking “pair bonding,” which is interesting 🤔

They use it as a way to explain how they feel women are supposed to attach to men, like it’s a rule women should follow. But that’s not really how women usually talk about nor experience relationships or attachment. Women tend to talk in terms like mutual love, trust, commitment, consideration, or connection.

Another example of this is the extreme emphasis men place on sex as the ultimate act of attachment. It’s weird to me because if you ask 100 women how their first time having sex went vs 100 men, I promise you the men are going to report higher levels of limerence, attachment (a.k.a possessive feelings), giddiness, and overall euphoria associated with sex. Which is what it is, we get it. Sex is their end all be all, but they’re projecting their experience as if it’s a universal one perhaps? Or more selfishly, they don’t care if it’s a universal experience, it’s the transaction he wants. Idk. Either way, the solipsism is annoying lol.

So to me, the way men use “pair bonding” feels less like a neutral relationship concept and more like a male-coded way of making a one-sided argument about some deferential fantasy they wished from women.