Even better! My husband and I read it together and ate it up. We just wished it was longer. Joes ranting now about humans evolving to most efficiently procreate. He’s drawing parallels to Joseph Heinrich’s Weirdest People in the World. And I’m curious for more on these voles… where the two species habitats are, which species has been around longer, variance on population density…. Fascinating stuff.
Let me try to give at least the start of an answer. Both vole species live in the US Midwest, with the meadow vole extending farther north into most of Canada. Prairie voles tend to prefer slight drier habitats. Population density can vary quite a bit on both species. Oldest? Hard to say; they diverged from a common ancestor around 7 million years ago (with quite a bit of uncertainty on that number).
Also, let’s hope we don’t succumb to the evolutionary pressure to most efficiently procreate. Doesn’t sound like fun at all. :)
Good read, though the question whether someone is monogamous or polyamorous is (for most people) simply based on their conflict-constellation and no conscious choice.
Also modern biology is wrong in many ways and keeps ignoring the findings of Dr. Geerd Hamer.
Also there are many different ways to live polyamory. For most people it’s simply a way to run away from true commitment, while for some it’s a spiritual practice of learning to love more fully beyond romantic love (which is based only on hormones).
I agree, people can have different motivations (conscious or not) for polyamory and there are different forms polyamory can take.
What little I know of Hamer is not positive (I think he's been sued for fraud and malpractice). As far as I can tell, his Germanic New Medicine has never been confirmed through success cases and leads some people to forego traditional cancer care. There's a lot modern biology hasn't figured out yet, but I don't think (just my opinion) that Hamer is where we should be looking.
It would be interesting to see a survey of hunter-gatherers and see where they are at. I wonder if the Rich and Powerful People who took us through the Bronze Age messed us up with their harems.
There's an oft-quoted number that 85% of hunter-gatherer tribes are polygynous, but that lacks a certain nuance, because even there, even thought polygyny might be tolerated, most pairing are monogamous (I know, surprised me too!).
"Serial monogamy is common for both men and women due to divorce and remarriage, and high rates of adult mortality. Polygamy (most often polygyny) occurs in most hunter–gatherer societies, but rates are usually low."
As a male, love-adjacent experiences and hormonal “highs” have always seemed to be correlating with desire to help, protect, be useful. To matter.
When partner appreciates it, it’s a strongest and primal feedback that fuels more love. Lack of appreciation and weak “emotional bridge” brings up some longing and courting behavior, and then fades if feedback is gone.
Your research is very valuable. I think separating courtship love and active phase love would give it more depth. Very different acts of the same drama.
That's a great point. There's certainly some back-and-forth required to, as you say, turn courtship into something more - which is also noticeable in hormone changes etc. You could theoretically separate three phases: lust (testosterone, estrogen...), attraction (dopamine, serotonin...), and attachment (oxytocin, vasopressin...). There is, of course, overlap in all these. It's very roughly 18 months to thee years to end up in the 'long-term' phase.
As a tangent, I appreciate you mentioning that feeling of mattering, which is something that, to a lot of men (myself included), is very valuable.
These posts are so delightful and fascinating. And I’m so glad you got there at the end about overplaying the biology card when trying to explain something that is often as ineffable as romantic love and about the feeling of it being something to behold. This is a place that I often get to when I read or talk about science—while mechanics are super interesting, experience is absolute magic. ✨
Also, glad that the chimpanzee balls loose end from your earlier note is now all tied up.
Holy hell. This is incredible. Like -I’m going to reread this in the morning- incredible.
Abigail! Thanks so much! Let me know if it's still good on the second read.
Even better! My husband and I read it together and ate it up. We just wished it was longer. Joes ranting now about humans evolving to most efficiently procreate. He’s drawing parallels to Joseph Heinrich’s Weirdest People in the World. And I’m curious for more on these voles… where the two species habitats are, which species has been around longer, variance on population density…. Fascinating stuff.
Awesome! Look at me, encouraging pair bonding.
Let me try to give at least the start of an answer. Both vole species live in the US Midwest, with the meadow vole extending farther north into most of Canada. Prairie voles tend to prefer slight drier habitats. Population density can vary quite a bit on both species. Oldest? Hard to say; they diverged from a common ancestor around 7 million years ago (with quite a bit of uncertainty on that number).
Also, let’s hope we don’t succumb to the evolutionary pressure to most efficiently procreate. Doesn’t sound like fun at all. :)
Ha! It’s our nature.
Thanks for answering my curiosities! I totally didn’t expect that. Very very interesting.
And gosh wouldn’t that be a drag.
Good read, though the question whether someone is monogamous or polyamorous is (for most people) simply based on their conflict-constellation and no conscious choice.
Also modern biology is wrong in many ways and keeps ignoring the findings of Dr. Geerd Hamer.
Also there are many different ways to live polyamory. For most people it’s simply a way to run away from true commitment, while for some it’s a spiritual practice of learning to love more fully beyond romantic love (which is based only on hormones).
Hey, thanks, Marco.
I agree, people can have different motivations (conscious or not) for polyamory and there are different forms polyamory can take.
What little I know of Hamer is not positive (I think he's been sued for fraud and malpractice). As far as I can tell, his Germanic New Medicine has never been confirmed through success cases and leads some people to forego traditional cancer care. There's a lot modern biology hasn't figured out yet, but I don't think (just my opinion) that Hamer is where we should be looking.
Thanks for reading!
This was wonderful, Gunnar. Thank you.
It would be interesting to see a survey of hunter-gatherers and see where they are at. I wonder if the Rich and Powerful People who took us through the Bronze Age messed us up with their harems.
Thanks, Ragged!
There's an oft-quoted number that 85% of hunter-gatherer tribes are polygynous, but that lacks a certain nuance, because even there, even thought polygyny might be tolerated, most pairing are monogamous (I know, surprised me too!).
From this study (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5540858/) on sex ratios and partner scarcity in contemporary hunter-gatherers:
"Serial monogamy is common for both men and women due to divorce and remarriage, and high rates of adult mortality. Polygamy (most often polygyny) occurs in most hunter–gatherer societies, but rates are usually low."
Thank you!
As a male, love-adjacent experiences and hormonal “highs” have always seemed to be correlating with desire to help, protect, be useful. To matter.
When partner appreciates it, it’s a strongest and primal feedback that fuels more love. Lack of appreciation and weak “emotional bridge” brings up some longing and courting behavior, and then fades if feedback is gone.
Your research is very valuable. I think separating courtship love and active phase love would give it more depth. Very different acts of the same drama.
That's a great point. There's certainly some back-and-forth required to, as you say, turn courtship into something more - which is also noticeable in hormone changes etc. You could theoretically separate three phases: lust (testosterone, estrogen...), attraction (dopamine, serotonin...), and attachment (oxytocin, vasopressin...). There is, of course, overlap in all these. It's very roughly 18 months to thee years to end up in the 'long-term' phase.
As a tangent, I appreciate you mentioning that feeling of mattering, which is something that, to a lot of men (myself included), is very valuable.
These posts are so delightful and fascinating. And I’m so glad you got there at the end about overplaying the biology card when trying to explain something that is often as ineffable as romantic love and about the feeling of it being something to behold. This is a place that I often get to when I read or talk about science—while mechanics are super interesting, experience is absolute magic. ✨
Also, glad that the chimpanzee balls loose end from your earlier note is now all tied up.
Thanks, Danielle!
Couldn’t leave ‘em dangling…