"Falling in Love" according to an evolutionary psychologist:

[Krankor]

Uh,no. Just because you know the nutritional contents of food and what is good food to eat and what is not doesn't mean that you're going to do that .

The point is, once you truly understand the problem and what is motivating it you have a better chance of escaping the trap. It's still difficult, but it doesn't do an ounce of good to start barking up the wrong tree.

[Seraphim]

The point is, once you truly understand the problem and what is motivating it you have a better chance of escaping the trap. It's still difficult, but it doesn't do an ounce of good to start barking up the wrong tree.

 

Therapy is not barking up the wrong tree. Nutritional knowledge does ZERO for my PTSD due to abuse. Wether I eat spinach or ding dongs I was still abused and spinach does zero for emotional balance but therapy does.

[Krankor]

Therapy is not barking up the wrong tree. Nutritional knowledge does ZERO for my PTSD due to abuse. Wether I eat spinach or ding dongs I was still abused and spinach does zero for emotional balance but therapy does.

I think we're talking about two different things...

[Krankor]

First off all. I've been following this thread and it's being very interesting to me.

 

Second Krankor, may I ask about this 'damaged goods' concept. Are you saying the amount of men a women has sex with men or the kind of sex, lessens her value? I'm not asking in an accusatory manner. Just curious what your honest answer is. I think as far advanced as we as a society want to claim we are when it comes to sex,we simply aren't. The amount of times I still hear, 'She's a hoe' or ' you can't make a hoe into a housewife' or ' I can't take her seriously she slept with me too soon' all these ideas that mean women must... be more chaste, less the man thinks less of her. What's your thoughts on that?

 

Well, in the context of the post in which I mentioned "damaged goods" I meant very specifically how I'd feel about a woman who physically cheated on me.

 

But I do think there are evo-psych reasons for the phenomenon you are describing; i.e. a "loose" woman is too much of a risk to invest heavily in as a pair-bond, but no problem for casual mating.

 

I can tell you that for me, wise or unwise, I've always had a "don't ask, don't tell" policy when it comes to any woman's past who I'm dating. My own personal ethics say that a woman's past is none of my business. However, if she goes and volunteers too much I can't unknow it, and any info she gives is going to be filed in the cost/benefit analysis, whether I even know it or not.