Moreover, there may be a feedback loop: MIGHT be some selective pressure in favor behaviors with a genetic component for women to wander less, so that the men in their lives actually do put effort and energy into raising the kids or at least supporting the family.
This does assume among other things that during the evolutionarily relevant period women have had primary responsibility for childrearing, but that's a pretty safe assumption, I think. It is also not written in stone,
None of this is biologically determined (a nonsensical notion) and all of it is environmentally conditioned (like all biological phenomena) if it is true (for example if the research reported in that Erotic Silence book I mention by Haym (sp?), married women in modern America have extramarital affairs about as often as married men), and it is a speculation. It is, however a SB explanation.
--- JBrown72073 at cs.com wrote:
> andie nachgeborenen writes:
>
> >And I hate open this can of worms again, but there
> is
> >an obvious sociobiological explanation for the
> double
> >standard, which does not of course mean it is
> >unchangeable or justifiable.
>
> You mean the fact that men can't get pregnant? I
> wouldn't call that sociobiological, though.
> Material, sure.
>
> Jenny Brown
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com