The Genetics of Lust

[perfectgent813431]

I'm not sure if this would be of interest to the board, but I believe in evolution, natural selection and the underlying genetics. I believe that much human behavior is driven by the natural process of genes trying to reproduce.

I believe that lust is a behavior that is driven by genes and can only last four years. The behavior of lust keeps the man close to the woman to protect her off-spring (the host of more genes).

It takes nine months to conceive a child and by the age of three the child has the ability to walk and run and flee predators. Within four years the child doesn't need the same level of protection, so lust fades.

Just a little philosophical bull crap for the day.

 

[JustBob]

I believe that lust is a behavior that is driven by genes and can only last four years. The behavior of lust keeps the man close to the woman to protect her off-spring (the host of more genes).

It takes nine months to conceive a child and by the age of three the child has the ability to walk and run and flee predators. Within four years the child doesn't need the same level of protection, so lust fades.

1. You seem to have the most bizarre definition of "lust" I've ever seen.
2. Your theory makes no sense on a pure biological level.

Man produces millions of sperm every day. His goal (in strict evolutionary terms) is to impregnate as many women as possible in order to spread his genes. Conversely, women produce only one ova per month, and if impregnated, has to carry a foetus to term for nine months. Therefore, her goal is to carefully select the mate with the best genetic potential, i.e. she doesn't want her single egg to go to waste.

So, considering that sperm is plentiful, it makes no sense whatsoever to argue (again, in strict evolutionary terms) that a man should protect
his "investment" for 4 years when he could be impregnating hundreds of other women during that time.

And I still can't fathom what this has to do with "lust".

 

[perfectgent813431]

I'm defining lust as an insatiable sexual attraction. The millions of sperm ensure the successful impregnation of the one egg. The genes only truly survive if the child survives. Without lust, the man would do as you say and go to the next woman. Lust ensures that the man stays with the woman and child until the genes are really safe.

If you look at many relationships (and I have especially found this to be true talking to SPs about their relationships) the spark typically fades near the four year mark (three to four years).

While in common culture there is something called the "seven year itch", it begins in years three to four. Then the issue is whether lust can be replaced by another element that keeps the relationship going.

 

[JustBob]

I'm defining lust as an insatiable sexual attraction.

Lust ensures that the man stays with the woman and child until the genes are really safe.

I somewhat agree with your first statement. Not with the second. Lust is a pure craving for sexual gratification. And your second statement implies "attachment" which has nothing to do with lust. Lust dies after sexual gratification is achieved, and must be replaced by something else in order for attachment to occur. If that something else doesn't occur (call it "passionate love" if you will) then the man will simply leave the woman and lust for somebody else.

Here:

Dr Fisher divides love into three categories involving different brain systems: 1) Lust (the craving for sexual gratification), driven by androgens and estrogens; 2) Attraction (or romantic or passionate love, characterized by euphoria when things are going well, terrible mood swings when they’re not, focused attention, obsessive thinking, and intense craving for the individual), driven by high dopamine and norepinephrine levels and low serotonin; and 3) Attachment (the sense of calm, peace, and stability one feels with a long-term partner) driven by the hormones oxytocin and vasopressin.

http://www.mcmanweb.com/love_lust.htm

 

[happygolucky]

I'm not sure if this would be of interest to the board, but I believe in evolution, natural selection and the underlying genetics. I believe that much human behavior is driven by the natural process of genes trying to reproduce.

I believe that lust is a behavior that is driven by genes and can only last four years. The behavior of lust keeps the man close to the woman to protect her off-spring (the host of more genes).

It takes nine months to conceive a child and by the age of three the child has the ability to walk and run and flee predators. Within four years the child doesn't need the same level of protection, so lust fades.

Just a little philosophical bull crap for the day.

I believe that your "philosophical bull crap" could be very true. I personally wish that I knew more about the human body & how some actions/reactions are just hardwired into us from our early ancestors. Weather it is true or not, for me, it is interesting to think about for a while.......... okay, now back to porn!

 

[perfectgent813431]

A really good book to read is by a fellow named Richard Dawkins. The book is , "The Selfish Gene". and you are right, enough of that, back to porn.

 

[John_Cage]

What you are pointing out is the K-select behavoir of all Homo Sapians. All animals have an innate will to survive (as a specie) but they do so in their own ways; usually depending on the environment and the intelligence of the animal. Some animal choose to have as many offspring as possible so there would be a greater chance of survival (r-select) while some animal opt to have relatively fewer offspring (K-select). The reasoning behind humans choosing K-select over r-select is because we are capable of providing enough care and protect for our offspring so that we no longer need to mate non-stop every season (we still do it, but only for the pleasure).

Lust is a fail-safe that makes us "want" to mate. I mean, do you seriously consider population the planet before removing your gf/wife's clothes? No. You do it because of lust (or you have to because she wants it, lol). Lust is the driving force behind our mating; and keeping Homo Sapians from extinction.

If you have noticed, usually lower animals have lots of offsprings and YET only a few survive; while humans have one/two children per familly YET our growth is a global problem now. It's simply because we can provide better care for our offsprings.

BTW, the 4 years thing doesn't make sense. A 3 years old is not capable of protection and providing for himself/herself --- in fact, some animals provide more care than 4 years for their offspring. You know how child stopped being "cute" after age 12? That's pretty much because they not longer need to be "cute" (which cause their parents to provide them with protection).

Also, within the Homo Sapians there are differences of K/r select behavoir (there's difference in behavoir for male/female, asians/europeans/blacks); however the difference is very small on the scale of a species.

 

[perfectgent813431]

Why does lust fad in four years. Has anyone on the board ever held lust for a particular woman longer than four years (plus ou moins).

 

[korbel]

Why does lust fad in four years. Has anyone on the board ever held lust for a particular woman longer than four years (plus ou moins).

Hello perfectgent813431,

Still got a BIG THING for Marianne of Gilligan's Island since the 70s...lol. And Jeannie's navel is still causing issue's. But, feeling very guilty about the Olsen Twins...only because there are two of them...lol. My tall hard friend gets greedy at times.

Really,

Korbel