The curious case of being a Father - You've F*cked up my hormones kiddo!
As men raise children there's a drastic diminishing in their testosterone levels.
Since this hormone is considered -thanks to the processes it is involved to- the "virility hormone", it is logic to believe that a decrease it its levels may affect (somehow) the functions that match with "masculinity".
In human males the testosterone is produced mainly at the testicles, while the regulation of its production is a hypothalamus-hypophysis (pituitary gland) matter.
This hormone, in males, have invigorating effects: Facial and body hair have a tendency to show, deeper voice, development of the Adam's Apple, increased muscle mass... I'm sure you know the list, including, angled face development and alopecia!!!
"- Dare to touch my kid and I'll fucking tear you into pieces with my bare hands."
- A father, always.
Besides all that, it also stimulates the libido, predisposing the man to be more impulsive and cunning (aggressive, if we contrast the trait with passive people), tending to create a courting instinct for the potential couples the male may pick from. Testosterone is, the "mating hormone". We may even consider it of key importance in the reproductive process of our species. Yet, it is not so simple.
In the species where the male also assumes the responsibility of taking care of their young cubs, the reproductive sucesss also relies on the capacity to provide sustain (aka: food) and shelter. And since those are limited resources the "teaming up" the parents perform to succeed at this is also a major requirement, and we thank you for this oxytocin!
This exchange of personal time looking for the well-being of the family can be called a "trade-off", where the time one of the members of the parenthood is dedicated to gather resources, the other one takes care of the raising; and vice-versa.
"Success" is measured by the efficiency of this trade.
We, humans, tend to be sequentially monogamous. We pair up for relatively long time periods. And the "usual males" (the ones that have the balls to BE one) give some attention to the child care, a task that is a years long compromise. (I know of some that never quit doing so!)
Under this context, if the testosterone levels were still high after paternity, it would increase the probability that the male would look for another potential couple: Leaving the children behind.
The curious effects of becoming a father, "softening up" just enough, to keep us around our children. Taking care of them, looking after them. It does not matter if it is a biologic even or and adoption choice: The word "FATHER" is a title that is earned with actions.
We lose our "cunning" that defines us as "machos". We soften up... Yet: It is all worth it when your children makes you proud thanks to what you taught them.
Monogamy came to be with the concept of private property, no evidence of it being in our nature, very unlikely too. We couldn't have survived in my opinion being monogamous. Not saying there's anything wrong in pairs of two if that's what the people involved want to be doing.
... because a measured increase in oxytocin as a couple forms is of course far from evidence "of our nature".
Have we studied oxy in bigger families to have a comparison point?
Of course we have!
AMJ Anacker has plenty of papers about that topic.
Do you have a link or any reference as to what exactly you are talking about? Because since we don't really have many places that are open to relationships where there may be several male and female individuals involved in a single relationship I'm having a hard time believing these studies exist.
And for all we know Oxy may have the purpose to mate and that's it, which doesn't require a family to be formed. How do we know the initial chemicals that drive attraction are related to the wellbeing of the family later on?
Seriously dude? You've more than enough keywords to make a search yourself...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=amj+anacker+oxytocin
No need to do this, I know very well how to search for a name on google. What I am trying to do is get straight to the part in which a study of oxy was carried out on families composed of many people and not just a couple. I don't think I'm going to find it because most people supporting monogamy are supporting their own choosing in my opinion. That is why I wanted your help, since you already went through these studies, to identify exactly what you think supports your statements so I don't have to waste time.
Yet, you have more than enough time to come question me about something you already know...
Odd.
"sequentially monogamous" is something that escaped your understanding?
I can recommend you a very nice book about the topic:
In there you can find plenty of paper cites, studies, researches, samplings to refute with weak fallacies so that you may satisfy your self-induced dopamine dose.
I *WILL NOT* waste my time replying to each single guy that thinks that because he read something at a shitty liberalist blog it is true, neither will I waste time replying to overused phrases that hold no meaning after being repeated so many times by people that just do not understand their meaning. Just imagine if I had to reply to each single retard that believes that the Earth is flat...
Have a nice day.
very good read.... I just found out not long ago I'll be a father... I can already sense I'm softing up.... but that's a good thing I think.
Every sons first hero, their father !
Nah, it actually is Batman.