By activating a gene in the brains of hermaphrodite nematode worms (Caenorhabditis elegans) scientists at the University of Utah have induced them to attempt to mate with other hermaphrodites; offering interesting new evidence that homosexual or heterosexual preferences are influenced by underlying biology.

Most nematode worms are hermaphrodites, having both male and female sex organs that can fertilize their own eggs, however one in 500 nematodes is a true male. Hermaphrodites will mate with an available male in preference to fertilising themselves, because although they produce sperm they cannot impregnate other hermaphrodites, as they lack the required copulatory structure.

The ability to reproduce without a mate is important for the worms, since they might only come across food sporadically, and thus when a worm finds a bacteria bloom, it does not have to wait around to find a mate, if it is to take advantage of this nutrition, and then reproduce.

The worm’s sex is determined by chromosomes found in its DNA. If a worm is male, all the cells in the body, including those in its brain, will be male.

The scientists were unable to change the gender of the worms, but by activating a gene called fem-3 in the brains of hermaphrodite nematode worms, they were able to fool their nerve cells into acting like those of the opposite gender. So, before the genetic manipulation, the hermaphrodites showed no interest in other hermaphrodites, however, after the procedure, the genetically altered hermaphrodites moved toward them, and attempted to mate with other hermaphrodites, instead of being attracted to the males.

Nematode worms are extremely simple organisms, and details of their behaviour are difficult to apply to people with any accuracy, but the researchers claimed that the existence of a biological pathway to same-sex attraction offered a possible insight into human sexuality.

Erik Jorgensen, who led the study, said:

We cannot say what this means for human sexual orientation, but it raises the possibility that sexual preference is wired in the brain. Humans are subject to evolutionary forces just like worms. It seems possible that if sexual orientation is genetically wired in worms, it would be in people too. Humans have free will, so the picture is more complicated in people.

The study, which was published in the journal Current Biology,  also found that the same nerve cells that produce male sexual behaviour are present in hermaphrodites, only they serve a different purpose. This means that both have identical brain cells resulting in different behaviours.

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Biochemistry, Biology at 6:55 PM EST

No Comments »

It has been established for many years that sex is good exercise, but until recently nobody had actually conducted a detailed scientific study to assess the exact caloric content of various sexual activities.

However, just last week, Professor Willy Grabber and his collaborator Dr. Betty Wolnt of the Neasden College of Knowledge, published their findings in the journal Busty Blondes.

The results of their extensive proprietary research are reproduced below:

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Humour at 2:06 PM EST

1 Comment »

Some of the people here at Seduction Labs are quite interested in the basis of human shyness and how people currently feel about meeting the opposite sex; so we’d be really grateful if you could spare about 30 seconds of your valuable reading time to help us out, by answering a very simple survey - (your choice stays completely anonymous).

Thanks for your help.

Votes cast after this date have not be counted.

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Polls & Surveys at 4:50 PM EDT

No Comments »

It’s sometimes been said that the way pickup someone up is to use emotional language, and there’s definitely a grain of truth in that. A lot of people (men especially) seem to solely define themselves as their job, so unless they do something exciting for a living, explaining to other people that they’re an Accountant or a Computer programmer etc. is pretty boring, unless they’re fortunately enough to meet someone enthused by that type of work.

However, I’d like to introduce a more complete idea based around the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion, which was originally created by Richard E. Petty (Ohio State University) and John T. Cacioppo (University of Chicago). Petty and Cacioppo proposed that persuasive messages go through one of two routes to achieve persuasion: the central route, and the peripheral route.

If the communication goes via the central route, a person is more likely to be persuaded if they are able to think about the message extensively. That is, if they are motivated to think about the communication, are capable of thinking about it, and if the argument is a strong one, then they will be persuaded to act in accordance with that message.

If the communication goes via the peripheral route, i.e. they are unable to elaborate on the message extensively, then they may still be persuaded by factors which have nothing to do with the content of the communication itself. In outline, they would be drawn to act on the communication by factors that they are already familiar with, which they have positive attitudes about, and then they would associate those attitudes with the message. They would then be persuaded towards the message, albeit weakly and temporarily.

The Central Route

Any attempt to be seductive is an attempt to be persuasive, and thus to steer someone’s thinking in a desired direction. So, determining whether the communication is in reality persuasive is the core of this model. If a communication is neutral, it has failed to be persuasive and the Seducee can take it or leave it; in which case this model simply does not apply. We can therefore assume that the communication was at least a little bit persuasive, so that we can move on to the next step.

In order for the Seducee to have motivation to process the message, it must have some relevance to them, i.e. it should pertain to something they already know about, because some small amount of familiarity with the communication content will encourage them to process it. People are often very busy, and they don’t get the chance, or even want to think about every tiny detail they come across. Psychologists term this phenomenon low involvement. When a person has no or very little connection to the subject or message, they tend to have no or very little involvement with the subject or message, and thus little or no desire to learn more about it.

The flip side to this is high involvement. In this case, someone that loves theatre would more than likely love to share their knowledge and passion, whilst attending a performance with you. Or a person that enjoys a good drink would no doubt relish the excuse to join you for a libation. Alternately, someone that enjoys shopping would be glad to have someone come along with them to help them make some important purchase. If a person has a high degree of personal experience with the content conveyed in the persuasive communication, they are more likely to pay attention and get deeper into the message.

So, the Seducee has been motivated to process the content, but do they have the ability to do so? There could be numerous distractions; perhaps they have children to look after, a prior appointment with a neighbour, or they are hungry and need to eat instead. TeeVee, the internet and other people wanting the Seducee’s time are distractions. So, competition from persuasive messages can often be fierce, whilst the Seducee’s time is strictly limited. They just might not have the opportunity to process the message, at that time.

The information being conveyed might also be too complex to comprehend. Someone that enjoys arts will definitely want to learn more about the subject, but a highly technical presentation or detailed history of some artist could be likely to turn them off because they simply cannot understand the information. They will therefore not elaborate on the message.

If the Seducee can understand the message and there are no distractions, then we can go to the next stage of the model.

If the communication is a well-constructed and convincing message, the Seducee is more likely to receive it favourably. Persuasion might still happen, even if the content of the message is different to the Seducee’s initial attitude; but if it is in-keeping with the Seducee’s previous opinions, there is likely to be lasting positive persuasion. The Seducee will have been moved even more in the direction that they were already leaning, and you will thus have reinforced that particular attitude for the future. And, at this point, the Seducee’s behaviour can probably be predicted as a result of the persuasion. So, for example the person will agree to do something with you, because they were persuaded based on the strength and relevance of your communication.

If the Seducee has been involved with the communication thus far, but there is no well-argued logical point, or the communication contained false information, there is likely to be a ricochet effect. In this case, the Seducee will reject the message and form negative thoughts and feeling about the communication. This would be especially true, when the Seducee has expertise in the field you are discussing (or a lot of previous knowledge). They may disagree with the ideas put forward in a cogent argument and simply reject the message, or see flaws in the argument and dismiss it as unreliable; thereby failing to be persuaded.

The Peripheral Route

Should a communication fail to go through the central route, it may find a path to the Seducee via the peripheral route. This would happen when the Seducee is not motivated to think about the communication, if they are unable to process it, or if the argument is weak. A communication using the peripheral route attempts to persuade by focusing on issues or themes that are not directly related to the subject topic of the communication. So, the message will attempt to grab attention by making the Seducee think about something that they are already familiar with and also has positive thoughts about (i.e. money, sex or a celebrity etc.). Advertisers use this tactic frequently: An example being Gary Lineker selling packets of potato crisps. There is no apparent connection between Mr Lineker’s football skills and bags of fried potato slices, but a consumer may be persuaded to buy a packet of crisps simply because he or she likes Gary Lineker. In this example Gary Lineker is a peripheral cue.

Robert B. Cialdini (Arizona State University) has identified six types of peripheral cues: Reciprocation, Commitment & Consistency, Social proof, authority, liking and scarcity. Each of these peripheral cues has almost nothing to do with the actual contents of the communication that your Seducee would receive.

Reciprocation is the idea that the Seducee is somehow obligated to agree with the communication, because of some past experience or information; basically, this is the idea that people tend to return favours.

Commitment & Consistency is making decisions based on thoughts or decisions that were agreed with at some point in the past. So, your Seducee might reason “I felt this way before <when I took some course of action> and I feel like this now, so I should take the same action now”.

Social proof is basically peer-pressure. The actions and words of others would be likely to influence the Seducee to be persuaded by your communication.

Authority is the idea that the Seducer has some power over the Seducee; people tend to obey authority figures, or it might be that the Seducer has expertise in some subject that the Seducee could benefit from.

Liking just means that the Seducer is likeable: They could be attractive, humorous, charismatic, generous or charming etc.

Scarcity is the idea that the opportunity will only be around for a short time, and so the Seducee should act now, before the chance disappears.

Now, if the communication fails to take the central route at any step of the process (i.e. the Seducee is not motivated, doesn’t comprehend or the argument is weak) then we can ask whether there is a peripheral cue available. If there’s no peripheral cue, then the original attitude will be retained and the persuasion attempt will have failed. If there is a cue, it may produce a positive, albeit temporary attitude change.

Even though the attitude change via the peripheral route may be temporary, it could be enough to encourage the Seducee to take action. They would now have some more experience with the subject of the communication; then later on, when another persuasion attempt is made, it may have a better chance of surviving through the central route and causing a more permanently attitude change.

Tips for the would be Seducer

The two routes to persuasion appear to exist as completely separate ideas, but Petty and Cacioppo point out that in any given situation, people can be lined up along a “thinking continuum” where they can devote a certain amount of thinking to the task, ranging from considerable to very little. There are a great many factors that could account for the elaboration (or lack of elaboration) of your communication. And thus, the stages in the routes might overlap as they combine with other factors that the Seducee is dealing with. On the other hand, the two routes are distinct enough that they indicate a general direction for a Seducer to follow in attempting to be persuasive.

If a communication is to persuade via the (stronger) central route, it should be well grounded in facts and attributes of the message subject itself. These elements will be more trustworthy in the eyes of the Seducee and will form the basis for a convincing argument, and as such a communication channelled through this route will result in lasting persuasion.

The danger of attempting to employ the central route is that if the elements of the communication’s are meaningful but the argument is weak, the Seducee could form negative opinions of the Seducer and/or the communication. Likewise, a negative opinion might form if aspects of the communication are weak, even though the argument is strong. In such a case, the Seducer should use the peripheral route to persuade the Seducee.

When peripheral cues are present, positive persuasion can occur, but this change is likely to be transient. However, for it to become a more lasting change the message should be repeated over a period of time. If there are no peripheral cues, the receiver’s initial attitude (most often a neutral of slightly negative one) will be reinforced or pushed in the negative direction. The Seducer’s choice of routes is therefore one to be made carefully, and should be influenced by the content of the communication, mood and environment in which the message will be received.

Finally, the following flow chart may help summarise the above information into an easily digestible form:

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Psychology, Sociology at 10:10 PM EDT

No Comments »

Oftentimes, we see the craziest stuff in films, but the strangest thing is that some people actually think it’s all based on fact, when in actuality, most of what you see on TeeVee or film is just contrived to meet a stereotype, and boost ratings, so that advertisers fork over more $$$.

Seducers will be familiar with the guy and girl get married and live happily ever after scenes, from most Hollywood endings, and realise that that’s not how real life works. And, as for girls being rude and bitchy to guys ALL the time, that’s completely daft.

Now, I was sent this list ages back, so I have no idea where it first came from, but I think it illustrates my point perfectly, and in an extremely funny way.

1. Large, loft-style apartments in New York City are well within the price range of most people (whether they are employed or not).

2. At least one of a pair of identical twins is born evil.

3. Should you decide to defuse a bomb, don’t worry which wire to cut. You will always choose the right one.

4. All laptop computers are powerful enough to override the communications system of any invading alien army.

5. It doesn’t matter if you are heavily outnumbered in a fight involving martial arts: your enemies will wait patiently to attack you one-by-one, dancing around in a threatening manner, until you have knocked out their predecessors.

6. When you turn out the light to go to bed, everything in your bedroom will still be clearly visible, just slightly bluish.

7. If you are blonde and pretty, it is possible to become a world expert on nuclear fission at the age of 22.

8. Honest and hard-working Policemen are traditionally gunned down three days before their retirement.

9. Rather than wasting bullets, megalomaniacs prefer to kill their arch enemies using complicated machinery involving fuses, pulley systems, deadly gasses, lasers, and man-eating sharks, which will allow their captives at least 20 minutes to escape.

10. All beds have special L-shaped cover sheets that reach the armpit level on a woman, but only to waist level on the man lying beside her.

11. All grocery shopping bags contain at least one loaf of French bread.

12. It’s easy for anyone to land a plane, provided there is someone in the control tower to talk you down.

13. Once applied, lipstick will never rub off (even while scuba diving).

14. You’re very likely to survive any battle, in any war, unless you make the mistake of showing someone a picture of your sweetheart back home.

15. Should you wish to pass yourself off as a German or Russian officer, it will not be necessary to speak the language. A German or Russian accent will do fine.

16. The Eiffel Tower can be seen from any window in Paris.

17. A man will show no pain while taking the most ferocious beating, but will wince when a woman tries to clean his wounds.

18. If a large pane of glass is visible, someone will be thrown through it before long.

19. If staying in a haunted house, women should investigate any strange noises in their most revealing underwear.

20. Even when driving down a perfectly straight road, it is necessary to turn the steering wheel vigorously from left to right every few moments.

21. All bombs are fitted with electronic timing devices, with large red readouts, so you know exactly when they’re going to go off.

22. A Detective can only solve a case once he has been suspended from duty.

23. If you decide to start dancing in the street, everyone you meet will know all the steps.

24. Police departments give their officers personality tests to make sure they are deliberately assigned a partner who is their complete opposite.

25. When they are alone, all foreign military officers prefer to speak to each other in English.

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Humour at 7:42 PM EDT

No Comments »

It’s been said that changes in male investment in mating strategies, mate seeking behaviour and parenting effort might be associated with changes in testosterone levels. But scientists studying the Ariaal tribe (subsistence pastoralists living in northern Kenya) found that they experience a decline in levels of the male hormone only after they get married, according to research published in Current Anthropology.

The Ariaal have an “aloof” marital system; whereby, apart from sex, husbands and wives have very little to do with each other, and the men are only minimally involved in childcare. Ariaal men remain single “warriors” until they are about 30 years old, at which time they marry one or more women.

The researchers measured testosterone in 205 Ariaal men, aged 20 and over; and (contrary to prediction) found that those with one wife had lower levels of the hormone than unmarried men, and polygynously married men had lower levels still.

Peter B. Gray (University of Nevada) and colleagues said:

Testosterone levels are lower among married men probably because they are investing less in mating effort, or to put it another way, they no longer have to compete for mates.

The finding provides both a social and evolutionary explanation for the decrease in testosterone, rather than an age-related one; and so, whilst variation in testosterone may still be associated with mating effort in young Ariaal men, political networks and wealth may be better predictors of marital status in older men.

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Anthropology, Sociobiology at 3:30 PM EDT

No Comments »

Lap dancers who are taking the contraceptive Pill get fewer tips from the punters, apparently because men prefer more fertile women.

Geoffrey Miller and his team at the University of New Mexico compared the earnings of eighteen naturally cycling lap dancers, from clubs around the New Mexico area, with lap dancers who were taking the contraceptive pill, over a 2 month time span.

Lap dancing is the most intimate form of sex work that is legal in most American cities, and therefore probably as close as researchers can get to studying actual sexual activety.

In their study, the researchers found that during the non-fertile periods of the dancer’s menstrual cycles, both sets of dancers earned similar tips. But when naturally cycling lap dancers entered their fertile period, they earned significantly more in tips than their pill taking co-workers.

Dancers who weren’t on the pill made about $70 an hour from admiring men, during peak fertility, versus about $35 while menstruating and $50 in between. Whilst girls who took birth control averaged about $193 per shift, with a performance peak which was almost a third less than women who were not using the contraceptive. These normally cycling lap dancers earned an average of about $276 per shift (a gain of more than $80 per shift), the study showed.

Dr Miller said:

This is the first direct economic evidence for the existence of estrus in contemporary human females.

It was not made clear whether being at their most fertile made women dance any differently, otherwise ”signal” or ”leak” the fact that they were fertile; or whether men were somehow managing to detect the more fertile women; but the pill produces hormonal signals indicating early pregnancy, and this would not be an enticing target for a would-be suitor.

As a further criticism, this experiment used a rather small sample of dancers; but this aside, it does seem to show some very interesting preliminary evidence.

A complete copy of the paper can be downloaded from Dr Miller’s website:

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Psychology, Sociobiology at 11:50 PM EDT

2 Comments »

A happy smiling face makes less of an impression on the brain than a fearful one, according to research co-led by Psychologist Dr. David Zald, of Vanderbilt University, and reported in the journal Emotion.

The scientists believe that our rapid reaction to frightened faces may be an instinct that evolved as a “threat radar” millions of years ago. Since the whites of the eye become particularly visible when a person is scared, possibly indicating a potential threat. And, such cues may take a short cut through the brain to the amygdala, which processes emotional reactions.

Dr Zald said:

There are reasons to believe that the brain has evolved mechanisms to detect things in the environment that signal threat. One of those signals is a look of fear

We believe that the brain can detect certain cues even before we are aware of them, so that we can direct our attention to potentially threatening situations in our environment.

The scientists set out to determine if people became aware of fearful, neutral or happy expressions at the same speed.

But, measuring response times is normally very difficult, since processing facial information usually takes the brain less than 40 milliseconds. The team therefore used a technique called continuous flash suppression, in which they asked a group of volunteers to look at images of faces through a special viewer; similar to the eyepieces on a microscope, but which was designed to confuse the brain, instead.

Multiple images were rapidly presented to one eye, while a “normal” static image was shown to the other. The multiple images serve as visual “noise”, which slowed down the speed at which the participants became aware of what they were seeing with the other eye.

Quoting Dr Zald again:

If you present different images to the two eyes, usually you will only perceive one of them at a time. The image that registers with the brain typically depends on which eye is dominant for that person. But if one of the eyes is presented by a dynamic, changing stimulus it will basically suppress perception from the other eye.

Using this technique, the researchers asked the volunteers to state when they first became aware of the static image, and they could then measure whether the expression on the face had any impact on how quickly the volunteer became aware of it.

The team found that people became aware of fearful expressions much faster than neutral or happy faces. “We were seeing it pretty much universally,” Dr. Zald said.

The amygdala receives information before it goes to the cortex, which is where most visual information goes first. We think the amygdala has some crude ability to process stimuli and that it can cue some other visual areas to what they need to focus on.

The scientists also made the discovery that their volunteers processed smiling faces more slowly than any other emotion. “What we believe is happening is that the happy faces signal safety,” Dr Zald concluded. “If something is safe, you don’t have to pay attention to it.”

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Jonathan as Psychology, Sociology at 11:24 AM EDT

No Comments »

Purpose: The primary evolutionary purpose of mate love has been to attract and keep mates ‘together’ to support child rearing. This ‘attachment’ to a mate evolved based on a mutual exchange of exclusive sexual/mating functions.

Mate love inspires a high degree of apparently altruistic and unselfish behaviour. Each mate accommodates the needs and desires of the other, even to the point of delaying or ignoring their own. This strategy creates a very appealing environment for each other. Actually, however, mate love is not truly unselfish. Each mate engages in this behaviour in order to nurture mate love in the other and to gain exclusive mating rights with the object of desire. This discussion will show why mate love necessarily depends on ‘mutual possession’ and is quite self-serving.

Love Exists Only Because It Is Useful
Because of the fact that for most of evolutionary history offspring often did not survive to reproduce, genetic continuation has always been a problem. This meant that a mating love bond was necessary to keep the parents together, thereby creating a safer environment for offspring. Human babies are so helpless and so dependent, for so long, that for most of human evolution the physical presence of both parents was critical, even just for protection.

So the same hostile physical environment that raised the need for a ‘protective and nurturing’ parent to child love bond also raised the need for parents to stay together. At least the environment favoured those that did stay together. All animals (including humans) have evolved different strategies for maximizing their own particular genetic success. For most of human evolution two devoted parents was a huge protective advantage. This protection would have significantly increased the likelihood of the offspring surviving to reproduce. Therefore, mate love, which kept parents together, was a strategic asset. It became stronger over time, and was reproduced in subsequent successfully surviving generations.

The success of the human species has resulted, not primarily from physical advantages, but rather from behavioural adaptations. Humans display a remarkable variety of behaviours as well as a remarkable flexibility and ability for new behavioural adaptations. Humans thrived by being smart and by adapting their behaviours in spite of physically superior competitors and predators. The primary reason why humans have large brains and well developed cognitive abilities is because it is the mechanism for learning new behaviours which is our primary evolutionary asset.

However, unlike physical advantages, new behavioural adaptations are not genetically inherited; they have to be taught from one generation to the next. Yet teaching requires the presence of parents. And the relatively high degree of behavioural differentiation between men and women (in the human species) meant that there was a significant component of learned human behaviours that was gender-specific. For example, if only the mother was ‘around’ learning of male offspring would be seriously handicapped. This meant that there would be an advantage for the offspring of couples who were able to remain together.

Emotionally attached parents allowed division of labour efficiencies and created a team-based nurturing environment that significantly enhanced the survivability of ones children from sexual reproduction. The mating love bond evolved because such a bond conveyed competitive advantage on the offspring of those who had it. In other words we love not because it is beautiful, not because humans are ’special’, and not even because “God is Love”, but because it was useful for our evolutionary survival.

Mate love clearly characterizes many other living organisms (particularly animals), and certainly evolved first long before humans existed. Although it is possible that is unusually strong in humans this is only because of the relatively high dependency of human offspring compared to other species, and the relatively high marginal value of two-parent rearing.

Love Is Different For Men and Women
Remember that a prevalent male reproductive strategy (in humans) was to mate with as many females as possible creating many offspring and maximizing the chances that at least some of the children would survive. This strategy (if successful) would create a high number of offspring to offset the relatively low chance of survival of each. Due to biology this strategy was only available to males, and due to its prevalence in the male population, one can presume that it has been a relatively successful male reproductive strategy.

For females, a better reproductive strategy has been to mate with relatively few males, and to select them partly on the likelihood that they would support her and the mutual offspring.

Logic suggests that a woman that did not have exclusive sexual access to her mate would experience more competitive offspring (fathered by the man that she chose as a desirable genetic mate). Worse than that, she might have had to share his ‘fathering’ resources and attention or even lose them altogether to the other woman. Either one of these possibilities would have been a disaster for the reproductive success of the female in an already difficult and competitive environment. Logic suggests that females would carefully select males to ensure they were sufficiently ‘bonded’ for ‘exclusive’ mating.

Observation of typical female behaviour confirms this logic. Human females often delay sex with a male till some degree of ‘bonding’ occurs, and then carefully guards sexual exclusivity. Although his sexual infidelity may result in her not loving him, his lack of ‘post-sex commitment’ will almost certainly cause her to do so.

For males, lack of sexual exclusivity would be even worse. It could mean that the subsequent offspring is not even his. In this case he would have lost his chance of producing children with that (presumably genetically desirable) female for 1-3 years. Worse still, he might never know the offspring was not genetically his and would invest his fathering resources raising the offspring of another male.

From the point of view of a man, if mating and reproductive rights are not exclusive he could be creating a nurturing family environment that then protects another man’s genetic offspring. A biological disaster for him in evolutionary terms; Therefore, the definition in this model implies that men in particular will go to great lengths to avoid non-exclusive sexual possession.

Because a man’s primary reproductive vulnerability came from his mate’s sexual non-exclusivity, his ‘mate love’ came to depend on her sexual fidelity (more than any other thing). And because a woman’s primary reproductive vulnerability came from the man’s lack of continued or non-exclusive physical presence, her ‘mate love’ came to depend on this dependability or ’stickiness’, (more than any other thing).

So for normal mate love to prosper a man promises to be exclusive, but above all things, to ’stick around’ after sex and the woman promises to ’stick around’, but above all things to be exclusive. The final result is similar but not symmetric for males and females; mate love is intrinsically associated with mutually exclusive mating, i.e. ‘possession’. In the long run, significant deviations from this implicit exchange will counter or dissipate mate love.

The importance of love between mates is that it had to create a complete mutual commitment to a single shared objective in spite of the fact that male and female reproductive strategies were not aligned. Almost all gender (mating) issues are a natural but inevitable result of this asymmetric biology.

How Does Love Function?
According to biologists, the primary way in which this particular bond functions is that the brain releasing chemicals during activities associated with the presence of this individual. Since sexual activity is the primary mechanism for accomplishing genetic reproduction, particularly powerful neurotransmitters are released prior to and during sex. According to biologists, the schedule of release of these neurotransmitters appears to last from 18 months to five years, depending on who you ask.

Whatever the period is exactly, it coincides (logically enough) with most vulnerable period of life for human offspring. If we need empirical support for the notion that the purpose of mate love is to keep parents around to rear the offspring, here it is; it appears to last as long as human children are vulnerable, and then declines.

Mate love functions in that we are highly motivated to hold onto the source that evokes these powerful and pleasurable chemical neurotransmitters; the source in this case being the person who triggers, in us, the release of these neurotransmitters. The chemical neurotransmitters are, like many other drugs, extremely pleasurable and highly addictive. The desire for sexual and other mating activities is based on the drive to reproduce the pleasurable feelings from the powerful neurotransmitters.

Love and Desire
Mate love is a desire for, and attachment to, another person based on a perception of their desirability and availability as a ‘mate’.

If the simple definition above is reasonably good, you would expect the mating bond to be most affected by the perceived desirability and availability of the person, as a mating partner. In other words, this definition says, that feeling this type of ‘love’ is directly related to your perception of another’s sexual attractiveness and their availability to you for mating. If the simple definition above is reasonably accurate, you would also expect the strength of a mating bond to weaken if:
1) Perception of ‘mating desirability’ decreases significantly, or 2) if the other person is not available, or becomes, unavailable (other things being equal).

Furthermore, since, (according to this definition) the evolutionary purpose of the mating bond is to keep parents together to protect their offspring, if:
1) Significant mating (sexual) activity occurs, or
2) Children result,
This model predicts that a subsequent decrease in sexual desirability (other things being equal) does not necessarily have to cause a significant weakening of the bond. The presence of children, for example, can produce strong bonds with even incompatible couples, keeping them together (happily or otherwise), for years.

In other words, this definition suggests that if you have a lot of sex and/or children early on, your ‘love’ will be more robust to decreases in sexual attractiveness. Women who fight hard to stay thin and then put on 70lbs six months after getting married, and women who get pregnant to ’save the relationship’, are recognizing these realities even though they will swear they are romantic and believe that “true love lasts forever”.

What Is The Connection Between Jealousy And Love?
Since mate love is based on genetic desirability, other things being equal, the greater the perceived genetic desirability of the mate, the greater will be the likelihood of ‘mate love’. Also however, other things being equal, the greater the love bond, the more is lost from lack of exclusivity. The departure of a desirable genetic father, or having your female mate impregnated by another male are biological catastrophes for the individual. Based on this logic, we would expect mate love would be characterized not just by a strong desire for mating activities, but also extreme intolerance of non-exclusive mating. Mate love is a powerful behaviour-changing condition that exposes the individual to considerable risk by mitigating its ‘normal’ tendency to behave in its own self-interest. This is the flip side of the precarious balance of ‘love’. A genetically desirable mate that is sexually unfaithful could then suddenly change from ‘desirable mating partner’ (requiring unselfish behaviour to attract them) to ’strong genetic competitor’ (requiring aggressive behaviour to compete with them). Jealousy is the mechanism that counteracts mate love to allow return to ‘normal’ selfish behaviour. It counters the tendency to behave unselfishly towards a mate at a time when it appears no longer in their interest to do so. To deal with the radical change in status of a mate departing from exclusivity, humans (and other animals too judging by behaviour) must have evolved neurotransmitter reactions sufficiently powerful to ‘overcome’ those associated with mating love. A sort of ‘love cure’; as strong as the chemistry is to inspire mate love, jealousy neurotransmitters would have to be, and are (if you ask me), equally, or more ‘overpowering’ in order to allow the individual to revert to behaving selfishly in it’s own interest once again. The key to note here is that the model predicts that far from being totally altruistic, mate love elicits ‘nice’ behaviour only as long as exclusive mating is maintained. Functionally, the desire alone to avoid the loss of these intensely powerful pleasurable chemical neurotransmitters could motivate strong reactions. But mate love neurotransmitters are so powerful, that they require equally powerful antidotes. The resulting combination of powerful chemicals in the body is unavoidably ‘overpowering’ or destabilizing. Thus jealousy can evoke uncharacteristically harsh, even violent, behavioural reactions. Also, judging by the way sexual jealousy feels subjectively, I would assume that these are a quite different set of neurotransmitters. Judging only by our own subjective feelings, we might conclude that, not only does perceived infidelity by a mate counter the neurotransmitter effect of love, but that ‘jealousy’ itself is the result of a different set of neurotransmitters. And they are not as pleasant. Threats to any organism’s important life resources must be vigorously contested. They typically evoke its most harsh behavioural reactions. Functionally, protection of reproductive assets is similar in many ways to protection of food (in an environment where such resources are very scarce). It is likely, therefore, that the chemistry is similar. There is ample evidence that in environments where food is scarce, humans, much like other animals, react forcefully and even violently to compete for food resources. Therefore, from a behavioural point of view jealousy is equivalent to the feeling of someone stealing your food when you are starving. In animals, the reactions also look similar.

Love Is Necessarily Selfish
This model of different types of love bond, does not suggest (as the Dictionary does) that what we call ‘love’ is selfless or altruistic, except to the degree that being unselfish brings personal benefits. Mate love is at its core a desire for mating ‘possession’ and is therefore essentially self-serving. We know this to be true from both logic and observation. The purpose of the mating bond is not to benefit the ‘loved’ person per say, but rather to inspire love for oneself and to create a nurturing family environment for ones own offspring; this is logical, because after all, unless socially altruistic behaviour conveys some definite personal advantage it would not be ’selected’ for, or survive the natural selection process.

Mate love is clearly characterized by unselfish (’other-serving’) behaviour. Yet although we think of mate love as altruistic, the love bond clearly only lasts as long as it is perceived to be mutual. This behaviour is therefore unselfish, but self-serving. Perceived lack of ‘mutuality’ will usually squash mate love and associated unselfish behaviour before it ever develops. Also, if, and only if, love is self-serving, would perceived lack of mutuality logically cause a need for self-correction to mate love?

Sure enough real life behaviours are consistent with this notion. We only love our mate as long as they love us back, and we are only unselfish as long as it is in our interest to be so. Mate love is still self-serving in that sense, and would not exist, in fact, if it did not effectively perform this self-serving function. Mate love exists because it maximizes ones own genetic success. It is part of the reproductive strategy of the human species.

True Love?
The ultimate test of such a model of course, is does it explain and predict real-world behaviours? Ask yourself; are these assertions consistent with your observations of actual human psychology and behaviour? Do they allow you to consistently describe and/or predict actual human behaviour, regardless of how ’shallow’ the behaviour may seem?

To test this model, try to remember how you usually feel when your ‘love interest’ wavers, does not love you back, or departs from the exclusive mating arrangement. If you cannot ‘possess’ her/him does it quickly turn to something far less ‘romantic’? After all, if there were such a thing as ‘true love’ then wouldn’t you presumably love them forever regardless of whether they loved you back?

How many times have you seen that?

Share & Bookmark this article:

Posted by Scott as Psychology, Sociology at 11:32 PM EDT

No Comments »

This was found on a religious message board, so if you are a Seducer with a religious streak, these religious seduction hints and tips could be just what you’re looking for:

1. Find an attractive prisoner of war, bring her home, shave her head, trim her nails, and give her new clothes. Then she’s yours. — Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 21:11-13)

2. Find a prostitute and marry her. — Hosea (Hosea 1:1-3)

3. Find a man with seven daughters, and impress