Early Marriage Better For emotional health?

[amigocabal]

A Biochemist’s Argument Against “Hooking-Up”

Birth control and abortion options, which have expanded considerably in the past 40 years and are hailed by feminists as emancipating women, seem to give both sexes the mistaken notion that they can have brief sexual encounters with serial partners and face no consequences that can’t be handled by clinic visits.

For men, that remains somewhat true — or as true as it has been throughout history. However, for women, that is as untrue today as it has been since the first humans walked on Earth. The reason is oxytocin.

“Love is the drug” and oxytocin is that compound! When pumped into the bloodstream, oxytocin acts as a “neuromodulator,” giving people the warm-and-fuzzies and increasing the emotional bond between that person and the second individual (whose presence is stimulating the production of this hormone).

Oxytocin’s power is not to be underestimated.

During millions of years of human evolution, the female system has been designed to begin a cascade of oxytocin production during two specific events: 1) When being intimate with a man; 2) When breast-feeding an infant. On the other hand, human males have very limited oxytocin levels (and actually release some of the little oxytocin they produce during “extracurricular activities”).

Now, oxytocin is a wonderful thing. It energizes people, and makes them feel good about life. It enhances the immune system, as well as boosts other biochemical processes in the human body.

However, as with everything else pleasurable in life, there is a downside. Once a woman generates oxytocin, she will usually want to do everything in her power to keep up the production levels. For example, there are tales of women who nurse their babies past toddler-hood (until 3, 4 or 5 years in age). These women want to continue releasing oxytocin (even though they will have other rationalizations).

The same thing is true following intimate relations. Oxytocin production can be stimulated in a woman through her lover’s voice, scent, sight and touch. This fact explains a wide range of female behaviors that follow intimacy. For example, women will call up their new partner frequently. They will steal their lover’s shirts to enjoy the scent. They will invent excuses to see the man-of-the-moment. And the more oxytocin these women generate when with their lovers (or by talking to them), the more emotionally attached they get.

Ever wonder why woman goes back to a man who beats and abuses her? Or question why supposedly smart women can’t make up their mind whether to dump boyfriends that impregnate someone else? How about ex-girlfriends who call endlessly? Then, there is the scary extreme of stalkers.

Since casual hookups and broken relationships can cause such emotional harm, would not early marriage, like before eighteen years, avoid this?

[General Zod]

Since casual hookups and broken relationships can cause such emotional harm, would not early marriage, like before eighteen years, avoid this?

Why don't we ask all the middle eastern countries that allow for early marriage?

[Stark]

These are the best one-dimensional analyses of the week.

Women like being near and speaking to their partners because DRUGS and MEN ARE IMMUNE.

Given the content of the articles, wouldn't early marriage actually make this sad suggestion of female codependency even worse? How would it 'solve' anything?

[madd0ct0r]

or give everyone oxytocin in pill form: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... utism.html

or go on birth control: (suspiciously small sample ahead) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3128427

Or just everyone have more sex.

Read the last paragraph in the OP's opening quote. proximity to the 'man-of-the-moment', nothing about feeble women brains being enslaved to a single male figure for the rest of their lives.

[Terralthra]

This isn't even casually true on a biochemical level. Oxytocin does not just produce warm fuzzy intimate feelings. Studies suggest that oxytocin creates intergroup bias because oxytocin motivates in-group favoritism and, to a lesser extent, out-group derogation.

[Stark]

Does that mean women are also racist?

Read the last paragraph in the OP's opening quote. proximity to the 'man-of-the-moment', nothing about feeble women brains being enslaved to a single male figure for the rest of their lives.

Yeah nothing about women doing useless or foolish things to satisfy their dependency AT ALL. The best part is the matter-of-fact statements of pretty ridiculous generalisations as fact; all women act this way because they're addicts. These things all women do are because of this singular reason. The best part is the second quote, where we finally understand that complex social and emotional situations are very simple, have a single cause, and it's DRUGS. All those behaviours that nerds dislike? Now we know why! Of course men are immune.

Ex-girlfriends who call endlessly are explained by this, and not even conceivably because they're angry, lonely, repentant, pressured, or broke. It's because they FOOLISHLY BECAME ADDICTED.

[Thanas]

I am sure forcing kids to engage into marriage will do a lot for their mental health. I am sure someone who just broke up with somebody will also appreciate being told "you should have just married him, it would have been better for your emotional health." I suggesst OP try proposing marriage to every girl he just met, it sure is to guarantee a long and healthy life for all partners involved. I mean, what woman can possibly reject the killer line of "You are addicted to drugs. Drugs you'll produce marrying me."

Relationships make or break based on many factors. What makes one think the same factors would not affect a marriage the same way? Oh wait, WIMMENS R ADDICTS. Just say no, peope.

[amigocabal]

This isn't even casually true on a biochemical level. Oxytocin does not just produce warm fuzzy intimate feelings. Studies suggest that oxytocin creates intergroup bias because oxytocin motivates in-group favoritism and, to a lesser extent, out-group derogation.

Which means oxytocin partially explains racism.

[TheFeniX]

Ever wonder why woman goes back to a man who beats and abuses her? Or question why supposedly smart women can’t make up their mind whether to dump boyfriends that impregnate someone else? How about ex-girlfriends who call endlessly? Then, there is the scary extreme of stalkers.

Because men never do any of this? Wait, if they do and we don't have any wonder-drug to blame.... are men just complete assholes?

Since casual hookups and broken relationships can cause such emotional harm, would not early marriage, like before eighteen years, avoid this?

Let's go way out on a limb here and say the premise is true and that all the emotional harm comes from from this wonder drug our body produces: what business do we have protecting people from their own bodies without their consent? Are adrenaline junkies and other sports players that slog through mediocre games for the one great hit, put, throw, turkey, etc that gives them an endorphin release such a danger to themselves we need to remove their ability to chase naturally occurring highs?

This would still be a social issue more than a legal one. Alcoholism is bad, but we don't force people into rehab unless their addiction causes harm to others such as drunk driving. Women who portrayed these "dangerous addictive tendencies" would need counseling to remove the addiction rather than marrying them off to solidify it.

It's like curing alcoholism by giving the addict a life-time supply of beer and thinking that would completely remove his desire to purchase any other alcohol for some "fun on the side."

[Scrib]

I honestly can't see the OP's point. Women find it difficult to engage in casual sex therefore we must get people to get married before sex? What? This seems to imply that because people are physically attracted to each other they will work as partners. No. Just no. What happens when the physical attraction is not enough to make up for broad incompatibility? Yup, people are now stuck in a binding legal agreement that will take a lot of time,energy and money to extricate themselves from.

[Memnon]

This isn't even casually true on a biochemical level. Oxytocin does not just produce warm fuzzy intimate feelings. Studies suggest that oxytocin creates intergroup bias because oxytocin motivates in-group favoritism and, to a lesser extent, out-group derogation.

Which means oxytocin partially explains racism.

This isn't the full picture, though. Check out this review from later in 2011:

The Role of Oxytocin in Human Affect: A Novel Hypothesis
Andrew H. Kemp and Adam J. Guastella

Oxytocin nasal spray increases envy and gloating, for instance. There are a couple of overarching hypotheses on what it does right now:

"Social salience" -- meaning that it influences prosociality as well as things like intruder and rival aggression, and increases salience of social cues like facial expression reading; and
"approach and withdrawal" -- meaning approaching goals and withdrawal from negatives, wherein oxytocin acts to increase approach-related behaviors; there may be other hypotheses, but I don't know the literature very well.

It's pretty annoying when people say that oxytocin is the cuddle chemical or whatever, but hopefully that will go away eventually instead of becoming accepted knowledge.

[Terralthra]

Indeed, Memnon. I wasn't trying to say "Oxytocin doesn't do 1 thing, it does 2," but more "narrowing down a chemical in the brain to any small set of activities is almost always destined to fail miserably." Most neurotransmitters and neurochemicals operate on multiple levels and influence behavior in multiple, often contradictory ways.

[Memnon]

Indeed, Memnon. I wasn't trying to say "Oxytocin doesn't do 1 thing, it does 2," but more "narrowing down a chemical in the brain to any small set of activities is almost always destined to fail miserably." Most neurotransmitters and neurochemicals operate on multiple levels and influence behavior in multiple, often contradictory ways.

Yep -- sorry if it seemed like I was targeting you. I was responding to amigocabal's post more, since complex social interactions in uncontrolled environments, like real-world racism, are pretty impossible to pin down like that. Though I guess at a population level that might be fine, now that I think about it. The OP article was what made the mistake of saying that oxytocin is this prosociality only kind of thing.

And hey, doesn't stop psychologists from trying on the basis of single-culture, small sample tests. Reviews tend to be better but...