Can my dear sciency friends read this article and tell me what is not true? I am finding this article wonderfully genderless:
Incidentally, these cues work because they derive from the basic mammalian infant-caregiver attachment behaviors that enable us to fall in love with our parents and kids. Only in rare pair bonders like humans can adult mates use similar subconscious cues to sustain their romances indefinitely.
I kept waiting for some hunter-gatherer, evo-psych bs to pop up, and if it did, I didn't catch it.
1 comment:
The article is genderless, I don't have any opinion about the claims, beyond it seems partly plausible, and probably unproven that pair bonding includes the same mechanisms parent child bonding involve.
Also you could easily create gendered pop-psych arguments with this idea.
Post a Comment