I think some the research on oxytocin is biased. Oxytocin gets released in men’s brains as well, and I think there are also some chemicals that lead to feelings of protectiveness. In my personal experience, men do bond a lot through sex. And men who have had fewer sexual partners seem to bond more as well — though correlation is not necessarily causation here. I’d say this is really unlikely to be causative for either men or women. There are certain guys for whom sex is a bigger deal so they don’t feel comfortable having casual sex, and they get really emotional during sex. I tried making a guy like this my fwb once. Guys like this can’t do fwbs.
What I have seen the most of is how science is biased by culture and will change over time based on cultural changes. We aren’t always looking at the big picture or seeing the data in an objective way. I know when I was growing up especially, it was guys who were super emotional and me who was cold. I was perhaps worse partly because I resented gender stereotypes and thought their broken hearts were funny on some level. I’ve seen these guys stay loyal and want to marry me years later, so it seems to me there’s a strong pull here.
I know I personally have spent long periods of time not wanting a relationship. I know I have dated guys I was not serious about or emotionally invested in just to get sex with less effort. I know I have broken up with guys who were devoted to me because the sex was not good enough. I know I have kept my exes (including those I broke up with) around for sex when I no longer had feelings for them (which I’ve always been honest about).
I also think the idea that women bond so much more is a bit amusing in light of the much higher rates of anorgasmia. Are women who orgasm during sex bonding more? Are women who are not orgasming with their partners at all bonding less? And how do we explain self reporting surveys where women say orgasm is not important to their satisfaction (though this is invalidated by research showing higher ratings of satisfaction correlate with orgasms)?
Also, what evolutionary function does it serve for women to bond more than men? How would that make sense? I’d argue that a man bonding with the woman does more to ensure his offspring’s survival than the woman bonding with the man. Whats the end of the man bonding with the woman? He sticks around, he provides resources for his kids, etc. You’d expect to see biological incentives for this. What’s the end of the woman bonding with the man? I suppose this would keep her from cheating, which would keep him around? I just don’t know what function this serves as far as ensuring her offspring survive.
I see a lot of contradictions in the narratives around sex. On one hand, we say guys like to connect more physically. We say they need that physical connection to feel bonded with partners, more so than women do (who presumably can bond emotionally?). Right? That would imply they connect more through sex. But then we say women bond more during sex due to chemicals (oxytocin) released during orgasm. Isn’t this a contradiction? But then don’t we also say that only 30% of women are having orgasms from penetration alone? So then are we saying women mainly just bond more when men go down on them? Or what? The focus on one chemical released in the brain potentially misses a lot. Also, oxytocin does more than just promote bonding. I forget, but I looked into it after my psychiatrist wrote mr a prescription.
I haven’t really looked into the research on this much. If I were to do that, I’d have to look at all of it and read through all the methodology. What I’ve seen is how cultural bias causes major problems in research on female sexual function and dysfunction, so I’d imagine this extends to research on how our brains experience orgasm.
What I know about female sexuality comes from.what I know about myself, what I know from a few friends, and what I read in research. The research indicates female sexuality has been changing a lot in the past few decades due to less suppression. I went over some of the studies I’ve looked at in one of my articles — ”Getting past bullshit […].” What I wrote is probably pretty biased because those were the studies I chose to save on my computer. We all have confirmation bias. I have a lot more in person experience talking about sexuality with and observing men.
There was one study I remember where people could not tell the difference between descriptions of orgasms written by women and descriptions of orgasms written by men. There are a lot of ways to interpret that. I don’t know if it’s relevant here, but I thought it was funny.
I think back in 2011/2012, I wrote up some stuff on bias in research on mating strategies and about evidence for female evolutionary incentive to seek multiple partners (biological evidence of sperm competition, preventing males from killing offspring, extracting resources, advantages of lack of paternity certainty, bonobos vs chimps, promiscuity in matriarchal societies). But I don’t know that that is relevant to this particular topic, which is I suppose that women can want sex while men want commitment.
On men wanting commitment: Commitment is really essential for paternity certainty, which is really crucial for men. They need to be able to trust that you aren’t having sex with other men. If they are just having sex with you, getting you pregnant, and ditching, your offspring are unlikely to survive — that’s a bad mating strategy.
On women wanting sex: I suppose sex serves two functions in both men and women: bonding and reproductive. Maybe women are biologically motivated to seek some kind of loyalty from men or something. I’d also argue that having sex is part of the mate selection process potentially. Maybe not, but is pulling out really something only modern men have figured out to do? Is there an advantage to sex without emotional involvement for women? According to some studies I’ve seen (would have to find?), men get more QOL benefit from marriage (and maybe relationships in general?) than women do. This could indicate men have more incentive to enter into committed relationships. But why would that be? This also only reflects the balance in modern relationships. Women don’t have the same need or monogamy as men do. What even is the point of monogamy for women? If a given woman is capable of providing for both herself and her children, it is in her best reproductive interests to mate with a variety of mates, as it is ensured that her energies will be going towards her offspring. So then it seems like the only point of monogamy is to get resources from the man. Does a woman bonding elicit a man’s loyalty? And how? Does her bonding keep her from cheating and is that essential for ensuring he sticks by her?
I guess I need to figure out why both men and women choose to be single when it’s in our reproductive best interest to form relationships. If the goal is offspring survival, we shouldn’t really be seeing so many single people. I think we have these modern ideas that you have to have your shit together, you have to love yourself, etc before you can enter a relationship with someone else. Both men and women will say they aren’t ready. Maybe my problem is I’ve spent so much time around guys I adopted this idea of not being ready for a relationship. Is this not common in women?
One thing I was thinking last night is whether more attractive women are more promiscuous, beyond what can be explained by having more options. Can they get away with it more, from an evolutionary perspective? Would men have put up with promiscuity from an attractive female? Won’t she have orbiters who will take what they can get and help her no matter how many men she sleeps with? I don’t actually know. But I just wonder who these women are with the low sex drives. Most of my female friends have been very pretty, so I wonder if that’s why they seemed to be more like me. Maybe this is not a thing though. I’m just pulling this idea out of my ass.