|Sumocor||Дата: Вторник, 01.10.2019, 22:56:50 | Сообщение # 1|
Статус: вне форума
|How to male masturbation better|
adult couple sex toys
Monogamy and infidelity: are we made to live as a couple?
Let's talk about one of everyone's favorite topics: infidelity. Traditionally, adultery has been seen as a kind of error against nature, something like a set of small cracks on the surface of what human behavior should be. Thus, the concept of "extramarital relationship" has been associated with a failure on the part of people when it comes to placating their impulses and forming a family.
In general, infidelities have been considered as an exception, something that does not represent the human essence. However, one might wonder if this approach is realistic. Have you ever wondered if there is a mechanism in our brain that guides us towards monogamy?
The quick answer to this question is: no, there isn't. In general terms, that human beings are not monogamous in the same way that some animals are is something that is beyond doubt. First, we must distinguish between sexual monogamy and social monogamy. Sexual monogamy is something strongly determined by genes, and consists in the practical impossibility of reproducing with more than one partner. This type of "fidelity" is something that is far from us and, really, it is doubtful that anyone could have much interest in experiencing this form of monogamy. For example, some species of lantern fish: when they reproduce, the male is physically attached to the female, much larger, and is digesting his partner until he absorbs it completely.
Infidelity between social monogamous Sexual monogamy, then, is a rather rare phenomenon in nature, since almost all species that reproduce sexually and care for the offspring with a specific partner, copulate with others at the minimum of change and then continue dedicating to family life with the same old couple. In these cases we talk about social monogamy, that is, a pattern of behavior guided by circumstances and not by genetics.
In our case, the same thing happens. The most we can say is that we are animals that sometimes practice social monogamy, but not sexual. This is the only type of monogamy to which we aspire, since we have the option of living fidelity as a pact, something that is reached between two people by our own decision, but it does not occur spontaneously in the members of our species ( or at least not in a generalized way).
And, although they are badly seen in some cultures, extramarital relations are relatively frequent in our species if we compare ourselves with other animals: gibbons, albatrosses, seahorses, etc. Therefore, considering them the result of the exception would deliberately ignore a large part of reality. In addition, non-compliance with genetic monogamy is not the exclusive heritage of men, since it occurs frequently in both sexes.
If adultery shocks us so much it may be, perhaps, because it is a violation of the norms, not because it has no reason to exist. It can be argued whether infidelities (understood as breaking a deal with the couple) are desirable or not, but it cannot be denied that they are fully grounded in reality: there are even contact agencies that make infidelity an added value in their Marketing campaings.
But then ... how and why did life as a couple originate in our evolutionary history? What is the point of a gap between sexual monogamy and social monogamy? Evolutionary psychology has certain hypotheses about it.
Evolutionary psychology and its horrible, horrible proposals In general, when we study the patterns of reproduction of the human being we find a great variability depending on each culture, but we do not see a strong genetic predisposition that leads us to have children with only one person, as we have seen. However, some evolutionary psychologists believe that in earlier stages of our evolution as apes there could be a propensity towards monogamy that natural selection assigned us for its usefulness. What was the main utility of having a stable partner, according to them?
The chances of having many sons and daughters that survive us. A rather sullen analysis, yes. According to this approach, romantic love, which is associated with a feeling of obligation towards the couple, is actually born from a kind of selfishness invisible to our eyes. Social monogamy would, in a nutshell, be an agreement based on self-interest and the transfer of trust to some extent undeserved.
It must be borne in mind that in itself, adultery does not have to be a disadvantage from the point of view of natural selection. For example, it has been seen that women with children born from extramarital relationships could have more reproductive success in certain contexts; that is, they may be more likely to leave offspring. So it is not even possible for us to say that infidelity is not very useful from the perspective of natural selection. But there is another thing that we have to take into account if we want to study the fidelity pact: the differences attributable to sex.
A mother knows that all the efforts she can make in order to conceive and raise offspring will be matched by the perpetuation of her genes. Compared to the male, a female is certain that the sacrifices she can make so that her young survive will not be in vain. Males do not have this security (in their case there are more reasons to doubt whether the offspring they protect is theirs or not) but, on the other hand, they do not become more vulnerable during the gestation period. Precisely because of this, according to the logic of natural selection, a male has less value than a female as a breeding pair, because the latter, besides being fertilized, takes care of the offspring for a long time. If half of the population of a species invests much more time and effort in offspring breeding, evolutionary psychologists will tell us, the individuals that make up that half of the population will become a resource by which the other half of individuals will compete fiercely. In addition, if the survival of the offspring is compromised by their fragility, it may be best for the male to always be close to provide resources and offer security. Hence, an emotional state similar to romantic love, relatively durable over time and that involves the exclusivity of a couple, can be useful.
Monogamy explained by jealousy and child deaths One of the most stark conclusions about the origin of social monogamy focus on the important role of something similar to jealousy. According to a study published in the journal Science, monogamy tends to appear in mammalian populations when females are very distant from each other and their density on the territory is low, which would make it difficult for males to monitor them all and prevent intruders from They will fertilize. So, if this were true, the care of the offspring by the males would be a kind of necessary evil.
There is another study, published in PNAS, in which it is suggested that monogamy could have arisen to prevent infanticide by males. This could have been so because, in many polygamous mammals, it is common that with each change of dominant male this offspring of the previous dominant male is killed in order to get the females to be sexually receptive again. All this is horrible, isn't it? If you want, you can think again about the monogamous customs of the lantern fish. Let's see if you recover.
Perhaps you have realized that all of the above is painfully reasonable if we think of the human being as an animal that is guided by certain impulses. In the vast majority of vertebrates, offspring already have the ability to move on their own within a few hours of being born, and some are completely independent. In comparison, our babies are born nearsighted, unable to coordinate arms and legs and with difficulties even keeping their heads off the ground. They need all possible attention, and they may not be enough with the help of a single agency.
However, many psychologists and anthropologists believe that it is cultural dynamics, not genetics, that explain the assignment of parenting tasks. That's why we are so unpredictable, according to them. Today there are many people who, despite experiencing romantic love and the need to be linked to a person, do not even consider having babies. Other people do not even believe that this form of attachment exists. This may be true because the great brains originated by this process of "pairing" would have made possible the appearance of a type of thought abstract enough to diversify the forms of love: love for the community, love for friends, etc.
All these links are characterized by allowing the creation of groups of close people that can help raise sons and daughters. And although the couple formed by the biological parents is not always in charge of raising the little ones, there is almost always a protective social circle around the baby, and it may even be that in certain contexts this type of parenting is more beneficial, such and as Skinner proposed in his novel Walden Two. In these situations, love can be seen as the glue that holds together this circle of people dedicated to breeding and replacing each other. After all, the roles of "protective figures", like any other role, are interchangeable.
One of the problems of evolutionary psychology is that it provides explanations about the behavior of the human being that most people do not like and that, in addition, are by themselves insufficient. For this current of psychology, much of the behavior is explained by being a result of adaptation to the environment (that is, to ensure that our genes pass to the next generation). For example, the relationship between men and women is seen as a game in which the opposite sex is used to make the perpetuation of the genes themselves, or of the genes that most closely resemble ours, more likely. In addition, we must bear in mind that the object of study of this discipline is something that cannot be experienced: the evolutionary history of the species.
Somehow, evolutionary psychology provides possible explanations about certain behavior patterns, but does not identify or explain them completely. Human beings are characterized by being acculturated, and learning explains much of our psychological aspects.
However, although evolution does not determine our behavior, it can explain some very general trends, and it can also help to formulate experimental hypotheses in the species to which we belong right now: Homo sapiens.
It is true that the attachment or love we feel towards people who are not our children could also be understood as part of an evolutionary strategy to ensure the transmission of our genes. However, it could also be understood as a phenomenon that escapes explanations based on biology. Despite this, if we want to descend from that idealistic conception of love to immerse ourselves in the swamp of crude scientific explanations, we must admit that there is nothing in nature or in our genetics that seems to go against occasional infidelities. It is even possible for natural evolution to see these scuffles with good eyes.
How to make really good sex toys for male
Скачайте плейлист на 340 канала, в том числе более 80 в HD.
|Sumocor||Дата: Пятница, 04.10.2019, 10:32:15 | Сообщение # 2|
Статус: вне форума
п»їmasturbator for menRomi Rain Storm Fleshlight for sale in LA
FLESHLIGHT SIGNATURE Selection ROMI RAIN STORM
You can feel each of the folds and intimate curves of Romi Rain in the model Signature Assortment Storm texture. It has an incredible softness, it is as if you were introducing your penis in the vagina of Romi Rain of great quality and with a perfect size.
It has a unique and exclusive design since when it is closed nobody would imagine that it could be a male masturbator.
FleshlightВ® is 100% safe and very easy to use and clean.
Using FleshlightВ® frequently, you will strengthen your erections and increase the strength of the penis, due to the training of the tissues of the member. You'll notice an improvement in a few months.
Romi Rain sleeve
Vagina with the inner Storm texture
Content: medicinal grade silicone, firm but multipurpose.
Realistic coloration like skin.
It adapts to all penis sizes.
FleshlightВ® is a world leader in the manufacture of male masturbators using molds from real people, their great qualities and qualities have given rise to a brand designed for men and their unique pleasure in the world.
It includes a practical lid, to be able to store and protect it, once used.
About the fleshlight brand
Fleshlight is a brand of sex toys intended for male masturbation, its name comes from Flesh (meat in English) and Mild (flashlight), is a worldwide patented product. A safe alternative to true sex. Products with the appearance of anus, bulba and lips, all of a hyper accurate touch, perfectly simulating human skin. Their masturbators are manufactured with a secret substance of the company, with several awards won and various patents in the United States.
Скачайте плейлист на 340 канала, в том числе более 80 в HD.