GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

Sands · 07-09-2007, 02:03 PM

Monogamy, insofar as evolution is concerned, relates directly to offspring. Whether or not we are intended to develop pair-bonds largely depends on whether or not our species' offspring requires the investment of a single, or both parents.

When each gender is viewed separately, we can see that each has developed a different reproductive strategy. Males have the ability to reproduce all the time, well into old age. Therefore, over time males have adopted a strategy that involves copulating with as many females as possible in order to send their genetic fodder into future generations.

Women, on the other hand, can only reproduce for three months out of the year (taking into account the nine month pregnancy term). Also, they lose their reproductive ability at older ages. Given this limited time period to reproduce (in comparison to their male counterparts), females have developed a reproductive strategy that involves one of selectivity. They can't afford to copulate with every male they come across, as males can with every female they come across, because they have a relatively short time frame to pass on their own genes and so each and every pregnancy has to count.

Part of this female selectivity involves finding a mate that is willing to invest resources toward the resulting offspring. In the ancestral environment, a lone mother trying to care for one or two children wouldn't make it very far. However, a mother AND father caring for their children in a harsh terrain would have had a much better chance at survival. Not only would a female have to find a male that is of superior genetic stock, she'd also have to find a male that would stick around after the dirty deed. In evolutionary terms, this would be pair-bonding.

So in essence, yes, our evolutionary programming has hardwired us to pair-bond for the sake of our offspring. Whether or not this is still applicable to our contemporary society is up for debate. We no longer live in the harsh, ancestral environment that the generations before us did, so perhaps long-term pair bonding is not as necessary as it once was.

07-09-2007, 02:03 PM
Sands Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: 418194907 Posts: 3,134	Monogamy, insofar as evolution is concerned, relates directly to offspring. Whether or not we are intended to develop pair-bonds largely depends on whether or not our species' offspring requires the investment of a single, or both parents. When each gender is viewed separately, we can see that each has developed a different reproductive strategy. Males have the ability to reproduce all the time, well into old age. Therefore, over time males have adopted a strategy that involves copulating with as many females as possible in order to send their genetic fodder into future generations. Women, on the other hand, can only reproduce for three months out of the year (taking into account the nine month pregnancy term). Also, they lose their reproductive ability at older ages. Given this limited time period to reproduce (in comparison to their male counterparts), females have developed a reproductive strategy that involves one of selectivity. They can't afford to copulate with every male they come across, as males can with every female they come across, because they have a relatively short time frame to pass on their own genes and so each and every pregnancy has to count. Part of this female selectivity involves finding a mate that is willing to invest resources toward the resulting offspring. In the ancestral environment, a lone mother trying to care for one or two children wouldn't make it very far. However, a mother AND father caring for their children in a harsh terrain would have had a much better chance at survival. Not only would a female have to find a male that is of superior genetic stock, she'd also have to find a male that would stick around after the dirty deed. In evolutionary terms, this would be pair-bonding. So in essence, yes, our evolutionary programming has hardwired us to pair-bond for the sake of our offspring. Whether or not this is still applicable to our contemporary society is up for debate. We no longer live in the harsh, ancestral environment that the generations before us did, so perhaps long-term pair bonding is not as necessary as it once was. Last edited by Sands; 07-09-2007 at 02:05 PM..