Inability to pair-bond

goatismycopilot · 2017-10-30T13:54:49+00:00

Those articles do not say anything about pair bonding, men being affected, or the hormone theory you offered up.

Atlas_B_Shruggin · 2017-10-30T13:34:45+00:00

Nothing in any of those links indicates "inability to pair bond", it's a spurious and/or speculative conclusion

storffish · 2017-10-30T13:47:42+00:00

there's no mounting evidence that sleeping with a lot of guys "reduces" a woman's ability to "pair bond." correlation/causation, my man. you're assuming that chicks start off with a certain amount of pair bonding capability and gradually lose it with every dick they sit on. lol.

more likely is that the traits that lead a woman to sleep with many men casually also make her less inclined to stay in/be satisfied by a long-term relationship. she's not necessarily unable to pair-bond... its just as likely she loves her boyfriend but just gets bored with the whole thing. that's always been my read on those girls, anyway. chicks like that are thrill-seekers with low risk-aversion: fun to date but not exactly nurturing helpmates.

and none of this even touches on types of upbringing (read: poooooovertyyyy) that lead to promiscuity. a chick who grows up being oggled and groped by the nasty older dudes on her block is going to see her sexuality as her only form of currency. in that case the issue, once again, isn't the number of men she's been with, but her lack of discipline and self-worth. when you grow up poor, you never see the value of discipline and delaying satisfaction for a larger return at a later date, which is a necessary skill for a successful marriage. you learn to get in, get yours and get out.

BiggerDthanYou · 2017-10-30T13:46:09+00:00

According to National Survey of Family Growth data the divorce rate for N=2 is 39%, but for N=21+ it is 36%. For N=1 it is 28%, but for N=5-20 it is 27%

If all those pseudo-scientific pair bonding theories are true, then why isn't the divorce rate noticeable higher for higher n-counts?

FairlyNaive · 2017-10-30T13:47:23+00:00

I think women wanted the ability and the freedom to sleep around like men

In the times when women didnt have that ability, men didnt have it either.

While men seem either less affected by this or unaffected at all.

Im too lazy to dig the studies rn, but most of those I found earlier indicate that its the case of "less" much more often than "not at all"

RockinSocksII · 2017-10-30T14:00:29+00:00

but the leading theory seems to be that women build up a tolerance to hormonal signals that come with "being in love" simply because their body releases the hormones whenever they have intense sex or when a men ejaculates inside her.

Any woman who is marrying solely based on love is in for a bad time.

Mr_Smoogs · 2017-10-30T14:02:17+00:00

I am not sure it's "inability to pair bond" so much anymore as it is that, as women age, there are fewer and fewer available attractive men. So the men they end up settling for just don't do it for them. It's not that they can't pair bond, its that they dont' want to and don't have to, to get what they want - support from a beta schlub, and occasional sex on the downlow with hot guys.

Merger-Arbitrage · 2017-10-30T13:43:05+00:00

You should probably add that higher pre-marital partner counts = higher chance of divorce* (edit). If that's not an indicator of something being off, then I don't know what is.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/counterintuitive-trends-in-the-link-between-premarital-sex-and-marital-stability/

I also wonder where people got the idea that the extra sex / partners caused the problem. It's really the other way around. What was in her head that caused her to rack up an above-median partner count?

wtknight · 2017-10-30T14:17:58+00:00

Dating many men means that women who are uncertain of what they are attracted to for the long-term are more likely to find the type of guy who they are attracted to. I don't think that they pair-bonded with the first not particularly attractive but accomplished man who their parents set them up with in the first place, and this just led to more unhappy marriages. The divorce rate would have likely been even higher in the old days than it is now if there had not been a social stigma regarding divorcing.

Lolashaulke · 2017-10-30T14:30:32+00:00

I think you're underestiminating the sheer amount of bullshit women hear growing up regarding how chaste they should be. I was a teenager when I heard about "no hymen no diamond" as a movement, I've heard all the bullshit about how it'll make your labia "roast beef flaps". I've heard that no man will want you the moment you spread your legs and I grew up in a liberal place. This is common enough and loud enough that it's white noise to me.

pinkgoldrose · 2017-10-30T14:58:14+00:00

People don't lose their ability to pair bond by sleeping around, they just never had the ability to pair bond and that's why they slept around in the first place. Why not let people who want unstable relationships have unstable relationships and mind our own business.

It is not 100% understood why men aren't affected the same way women are in regards to pair bonding but the leading theory seems to be that women build up a tolerance to hormonal signals that come with "being in love" simply because their body releases the hormones whenever they have intense sex or when a men ejaculates inside her.

What did I just read? Whose leading theory? It doesn't sound scientific at all.

The Dailymail article seems particularly callous and editorialized. I'm not contesting the data per say, but I'm contesting their interpretation. The "researchers" are a "totally non partisan" group with the mission to "identify strategies to increase marital quality and stability". Their study isn't peer reviewed nor published.

Why would anyone "find it difficult to commit to their spouse because they were aware of the alternatives"? If you've only had one relationship, you might wonder if it's a bad relationship. If you've found a relationship that's better than your previous relationships, that's a good incentive to marry him.

EliteSpartanRanger · 2017-10-30T16:50:45+00:00

It's not about sleeping around leading to lower pair bonding ability, but the fact that women who tend towards monogamy tend to not sleep around. They are told by culture and by older people that if they want to get married, they should remain pure or at least not sleep around too much because it will mean that men not want to marry them. On the other hand many men are culturally told to sow their oats and then marry the one they choose. So even monogamy-tended men might sleep around a bit.

Electra_Cute · 2017-10-30T13:42:42+00:00

it would seem rational to educate young women on the dangers of losing the ability to pair-bond and then have them decide for themselves

Stop educating people by telling them what is right or wrong, or what they should be doing, just leave people alone and let them do what they want. Females can have sexual intercourse with who they choose to, as long as it is not directly inhibiting your personal ability to live, why care about it at all?

Mr_Smoogs · 2017-10-30T14:38:15+00:00

Hedonism is fun. I have seen no negative effects from partying, doing drugs, fucking bitches and shit man just loads of fun. Why should I or any other man or woman stop? Cuz incels on Reddit are jealous they cannot do it for themselves?

AutoModerator · 2017-10-30T13:30:49+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.

rulenumber303 · 2017-10-30T13:59:23+00:00

I'm not convinced it reduces pairbonding but if it did I think reducing a tendency to instantly and irrationally pair bond would be a feature not a bug. If a man is lacking in substance she won't end up stuck with him and hopefully will cast him aside before any kids are brought into the relationship. Good thing.

ivegotsomequestions0 · 2017-10-30T16:21:41+00:00

t is not 100% understood why men aren't affected the same way women are in regards to pair bonding but the leading theory seems to be that women build up a tolerance to hormonal signals that come with "being in love" simply because their body releases the hormones whenever they have intense sex or when a men ejaculates inside her. Conversely, men seem to have smaller hormonal releases and are slower to build up tolerances to hormonal signals.

Is there any evidence of this that you can link us to? Every study I've seen, including the ones you linked, merely shows the outcome, and the process of getting there is not included.

In actuality, my observations tell me that the girls I have known who have trouble maintaining relationships and have slept around have always had personality traits that would lead to both, even when they were low n count teenagers they were already noncommittal and thrill seeking. There wasn't a point in time when they would have been red pill wife material. There's also a factor of religious and conservative values causing marriages to remain intact, which makes good sense given the relatively steep increase in divorce for just one or two premarital partners, compared to a more gradual increase for more partners after that.

In contrast, I never experienced a bonding sensation with most of my sex partners, unless I already felt passionately about them - and then, I had those feelings not just during sex, but also at many other times with them. That there is 1) an automatic sexual oxytocin release that 2) diminishes pair bonding far more than other oxytocin releases just doesn't track my experience.

If you're going to tell me that my observations are wrong and the issue is really some sexual hormone release tolerance, then there needs to be some evidence for the hormone issue. That is especially so given that many others agree with my observations.

I think that red pill is right not when they say that diminished pair bonding comes from quantity of sexual partners, but when they say that it happens after having had a partner whom you were really crazy about. Every man afterward will be compared to him. However, it is possible even for a virgin to get hung up on one very attractive man, and it's also possible for a woman to sleep with 20+ guys before finally meeting and marrying one who gets her off and drives her crazy like no other man before.

Butt-Factory · 2017-10-30T18:34:22+00:00

Are there actually any credible sources available on this theory? I'm not going to read a daily mail link.

I ask because emotional attachment is not a quantifiable, finite resource that can be measured or "used up". My own experience tells me it's bullshit. I have a high n count and have had no issues committing in healthy long-term relationships at all.

[deleted] · 2017-10-31T20:53:54+00:00

Yeah it's just irresponsible of feminists that they won't talk about cons of being slutty, it's always a bullshit overly idealistic picture loaded with the language of "freedom and getting back at the patriarchy "

Title	Inability to pair-bond
Author	Mr_Smoogs
Upvotes	7
Comments	198
Date	October 30, 2017 1:30 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/79npn6/inability_to_pairbond/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/inability-to-pair-bond.265112 https://theredarchive.com/post/265112

Comments