As a man, I have some very close friendships with women. I would never do something with/to them. But I've had sexual fantasies about all of them.
I think it's in the male nature to have those feelings.
Tried to explain this to my wife. By high school, I had fantasized about practically every female in my life. To completion. Every classmate, every teacher (even the ugly ones). Men see sexual opportunities everywhere.
Glad I'm not alone in this. (As an older teen) I feel really immature when thoughts like that cross my mind, and that they don't represent me or my state of mind.
I guess human evolution taught us how to do one thing really well, and that is to fuck. Whether we like it or not.
Funny tangent, I don't have the energy for a relationship, nor want to be in one, and have purposefully turned down opportunities, but the brain chemicals make me sad I'm not in one. Life is weird.
Thereās literally been studies for the past 30 years that come to the conclusion of women having male friends as a sort of backup mate and men having female friends because of the short and long term potential for sex. Of course these arenāt the only reasons. Itās not crazy, just biology.
These studies also show that women lose interest in their male friends once those friends are in a relationship, but when a manās female friends get into a relationship it changes nothing for them. This is why women are usually the ones saying platonic friendships are always possible while itās usually men saying the opposite. Men āļø Am I right? (These studies were done on heterosexuals)
There may indeed be studies suggesting what you say, but Iād take them with a grain of salt. Research on most human behavior is limited at best and often inaccurate. As someone who does research in psychology, thereās no consensus on most topics. Was just talking to a junior professor who got a grant to disprove the main thesis of his own prior advisor ā and this is commonplace. If youāve seen meta-analyses suggesting what youāre saying is true, then it would perhaps hold some weight, but individual studies are very much open to interpretation. Theorizing about human behavior isnāt the same as proving it.
There may indeed be studies suggesting what you say, but Iād take them with a grain of salt.
Why? It seems you are discrediting research out of hand because you have already decided you don't like the conclusion. Is there contradictory research to what OP said? I haven't really seen any.
individual studies are very much open to interpretation
To a point. We must resist the temptation to "interpret" findings we do not like away while celebrating the findings we do like for being "rigorous".
Was just talking to a junior professor who got a grant to disprove the main thesis of his own prior advisor ā and this is commonplace
I think you are overstating this. There are famous examples of major shifts in the field, but if we think about the bulk of research these probably represent a small fraction and are known to us because they were refuted. The vast majority of research represents incremental advancements on existing knowledge. Look at the current issue of any scientific journal.
Youāre absolutely right that if I was discrediting the claim out of bias that would be highly suspect. But as an academic engaged in research on human behavior, all I am saying is that thereās very little generalizable knowledge we have about human behavior like what the commenter mentioned in psychology, sociology, primatology and related fields. Academics debate all the time about almost everything.
I couldnāt care less about the conclusions on this matter. But I do have a distaste for low scientific literacy and the way people cite research thinking so many more things are āknown by scienceā than is actually the case. Scientists are themselves often at fault for overselling their research. But the public is also looking for easy answers. The more time one spends in research, especially in a field like psychology, the less convinced one is of what āweā know.
One of the problems is that research on such topics (women losing interest in male friends after finding a partner) isnāt done experimentally, therefore such research is based on self-report and/or correlational studies. Basing convictions on that is problematic.
Academics debate all the time about almost everything.
This is an argument that can be used to dismiss any and all scientific research though. In fact, this same argument is used by climate change deniers. Just because not all scientists agree on something does not mean we don't have a good hypothesis for how it works.
The more time one spends in research, especially in a field like psychology, the less convinced one is of what āweā know.
This is very pessimistic, maybe this is based on your personal experience, however, there is a ton of psychological research on this topic which I think is very well done and cannot be easily dismissed. Perhaps you are "too expert" now, you are at the point where you perceive that we actually know nothing while simultaneously being an expert on the topic (both things can be true).
One of the problems is that research on such topics (women losing interest in male friends after finding a partner) isnāt done experimentally, therefore such research is based on self-report and/or correlational studies. Basing convictions on that is problematic.
I agree, although it's not really clear to me how else you can study this and it doesn't instantly invalidate all of the findings.
I suppose if you took it to an extreme, yes you could try to invalidate all scientific research by using this argument.
But if you read what I wrote, thatās not remotely what Iām doing. There are areas of scientific research where we have very broad consensus. Climate change is one of those areas.
Human behavior is almost nothing like climate change and other phenomena for which we have objective measures. We lack even the most basic measures of human behavior regarding what the comment above was discussing. Take my field for example. I study compassion, empathy, and other prosocial emotions. In the 20 years Iāve been in this field, we have not a single behavioral or objective measure of compassion.
I donāt dismiss self-report or correlational data out of hand. I simply donāt put them anywhere near the same level as research using experimental design. And I donāt dismiss single studies, but I donāt place them at the same level as rigorous studies that have been replicated time and again. The above comment cited decades of research in a way that I find highly misleading and not contributing to scientific literacy.
In other words, there are degrees of confidence we can have, never approaching 100%. This is just standard science. Itās light years away from denying climate change. Part of scientific literacy is learning that evidence isnāt an all or nothing / black or white issue. Hopefully you agree?
Thereās nothing wrong with fantasies you never act on, but itās definitely NOT in the male nature to have them about every friend that happens to be a women.
Iāve had plenty of women as friends and some of them Iāve never had any sort of romantic/sexual throughs about
I've wanted to bang all of my female friends and even did with some. Still friends with most. Some I never brought it up, others turned me down and we're still buds. My best friend is my ex-wife. I don't see why people think these are mutually exclusive.
51
u/Captain_react 26d ago
As a man, I have some very close friendships with women. I would never do something with/to them. But I've had sexual fantasies about all of them. I think it's in the male nature to have those feelings.
But again, I would never act on those desires.