Having experienced long distance love so many times, through my own and my friends' stories, I feel that those who "need sex" the most are the ones to fall first.
From what I remember, it isn't only a question of amount but a question of the cycle, the series of successive events that form human procreation as a whole.Just because the largest amount of oxytocin is released during childbirth doesn't mean the smaller amount from sex doesn't affect them. Or at least the woman since from what I understand, men only get the effects when they see their child.
I doubt I would have ever survived a long distance relationship if I hadn't known in advance about the dynamics it can be victim of.So I see your point, but at the same time two mature people in a relationship can make it work without the chemical influx.
I think this could be because a difference in our enneagram type and just life experiences, but I don't think you always need to play for the cup. In fact, I've noticed the most successful relationships are the ones that don't even have the cup on their mind. They just live and then things progress naturally. It's like how @MuChApArAdOx and her husband started out as just having fun, but that turned into a 15 (?) year marriage that's still continuing. When you place expectations on something forces come to prey on your fears. It's just that when something is on your mind you notice things you normally wouldn't and that leads to painting false pictures of the situation.Analogy: It is a bit like training a lot for a tournament by playing smaller games. You don't win the Cup if you stop playing after the drills
You realize that many bonds break once the child is born? Couples stop being intimate, etc. Very common. Don't ever expect a child to bring you closer together. You may be obligated to each other for the rest of the child's life, but it has nothing to do with oxytocin and bonding.Yes, only one, although he's not literally mine. Why?
Which information sounded wrong?
Maybe the "Cup analogy" was too much of a tournament in this situation I didn't mean literally having "the cup" on our mind (as in having a child).I think this could be because a difference in our enneagram type and just life experiences, but I don't think you always need to play for the cup. In fact, I've noticed the most successful relationships are the ones that don't even have the cup on their mind. They just live and then things progress naturally.
I must say that I have experienced quite the opposite and witness the opposite all around me.You realize that many bonds break once the child is born? Couples stop being intimate, etc. Very common. Don't ever expect a child to bring you closer together. You may be obligated to each other for the rest of the child's life, but it has nothing to do with oxytocin and bonding.
Many relationships don't make it after a child is born. And even the strongest relationships will go through a major shift with the birth of a child. Couples often have to work very hard at rediscovering each other again after a child, if they make it at all. You have to work twice as hard to make your relationship with your spouse a priority after the children are born.
Bold.And what is the reason for this?
If I'm understanding your question correctly, the reason birth rates aren't 100% is (and I'll go more into in your next bit) because we don't know when a female is fertile. If we're having sex all the time and the woman's only fertile for 1/3rd of the month, that means there's approximately a 30% birth rate per time having sex--if it's that high, even.
Not sure what exactly you mean by suggesting that we don't have any signals...
The bonobo example is a good and entertaining one. A particular species of bonobo signals its fertility when the female's vagina swells to epic proportions. When the male is ready to mate, he puts on a mating display where his penis enlarges and turns bright red. We don't have anything like that whatsoever.
Well, is that is the only reason, biologically speaking?
Not nearly. We're K-selected, meaning we don't have many young at one time. Our kids are absolutely stupid for the first few years of their lives. It's difficult to reliably reproduce. We were hunter-gatherers. The list goes on.
What about the evolution of cultural transmission and more complex education in our species (i.e. greater neural conformity)?
And all that makes part of our transition from survival of the fittest to survival of the smartest?
In this case, "smartest" and "fittest" are the same exact thing. We are "fit" to survive because our intelligence has allowed us to gather food and survive to reproduce. Your last point, it seems, is irrelevant as it's a misunderstanding and misapplication of Darwin's unfortunately-phrased term.
no i understand and appreciate that. i was speaking more in terms of the pedestal in which i would watch my friends regard it, boys will be boys. i'm not going to pretend i didn't think about it from time to time, but i knew when i'd be ready and it was never more than that for me.For a woman, sex is letting someone enter her. It's a very intimidating concept, but with the right person it's a beautiful showcase of trust and compassion. I'm not saying that women are the only people who get nervous, just a thought on why you weren't.