Le 4 mai 2021, la plateforme Yahoo Questions/Réponses fermera. Elle est désormais accessible en mode lecture seule. Aucune modification ne sera apportée aux autres sites ou services Yahoo, ni à votre compte Yahoo. Vous trouverez plus d’informations sur l'arrêt de Yahoo Questions/Réponses et sur le téléchargement de vos données sur cette page d'aide.

LG
Lv 7
LG a posé la question dans Social ScienceGender Studies · il y a 9 ans

Does the idea that women want relationships more than men because of evolution make any sense?

I've heard the argument that women want men who are going to stick around because it'll ensure that babies will be provided for. But from an evolution/genetics standpoint, don't men have just as much interest in the children they father surviving? And if they bolt, the child will be much less likely to survive?

8 réponses

Pertinence
  • ?
    Lv 7
    il y a 9 ans
    Réponse favorite

    I tend to think it has more to do with social constructionism. That is, it's a social construct -women are told/shown (through example, often) from an early age that they should and will want monogamy, that that's the proper way of expressing their gender and sexuality, and that they should be ashamed to want anything different.

    Men are told/shown from an early age that they should be proud of their sexuality, that sex is a conquest, that they should avoid being 'burdened' with monogamy.

    Evolution may play a role as well, but it's not just evolution. Our behaviour is more than our biology.

  • Anonyme
    il y a 9 ans

    Evolution works on the principle of natural selection, according to which traits are selected for when such traits enhance survival of the species. If males "bolted" in primitive times it was either to hunt and provide for the family or to impregnate other women. In either scenario, survival of the species was enhanced. The masculine role was not to stick around with the children. The masculine role was to exhibit promiscuous sexual behavior and aggression (in order to succeed in hunting and combat). It was the feminine role to stick around and nurture the children. Both masculine and feminine roles enhanced survival of the species and are thus consistent with the theory of evolution.

    Source(s) : Biology major.
  • Anonyme
    il y a 9 ans

    It does seem to make sense on some levels. There are a lot of other social factors that contribute to this argument, though.

  • Max
    Lv 7
    il y a 9 ans

    If one male has 400 mates, and the other has 1 but provides for the offspring, who do you think will likely have more reproductive success?

  • il y a 9 ans

    Evolutionarily speaking, he is bolting to find a hotter chick to breed with and have better looking kids with who will survive.

  • GaryT.
    Lv 4
    il y a 9 ans

    As they don't have physical power or brain power, women had to develop other sources of power or risk being extinct.

    Love was created for the benefit of females.

    Female beauty " "

    Sexuality " "

  • ?
    Lv 6
    il y a 9 ans

    And male lions eat their own cubs.

  • Anonyme
    il y a 9 ans

    Yes it does. You just explained why

Vous avez d’autres questions ? Pour obtenir des réponses, posez vos questions dès maintenant.