"From an evolutionary point of view, it makes sense that sex can sometimes be experienced as a means to an end rather than inherently rewarding:
Different reproductive costs: Women historically bore higher biological costs from sex (pregnancy, childbirth, nursing). This made them more selective and cautious—sex wasn’t “just fun,” it had heavy consequences. That predisposition lingers.
Parental investment theory (Trivers): Because women invest more in offspring, their evolved psychology emphasizes long-term mate quality and stability over frequent copulation for its own sake. When those conditions aren’t met, sex may feel like a duty rather than a drive.
Adaptive shifts in desire: Female sexual desire fluctuates with the menstrual cycle, relationship security, and resource availability. In contexts where reproduction isn’t beneficial (stress, poor partner support, no desire for more children), desire can downshift.
Pair-bond maintenance: Over time, long-term relationships involve “maintenance sex” to secure male commitment and resources. Evolutionarily, sometimes sex was less about pleasure and more about ensuring continued support.
Mismatch with modern conditions: Modern contraception, chronic stress, work, and social expectations can suppress natural desire signals. The body’s evolved system isn’t optimized for today’s environment, so sex can feel detached from instinctual reward.
In short: evolution shaped female sexuality to be highly conditional and strategic. If the context doesn’t align with those evolved conditions, sex can easily feel like a task or chore, rather than a spontaneous pleasure."
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen