[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] annoyinginge From an evolutionary PoV, babies are expensive for women (lots of energy and food put into making them, vulnerable during last few months of pregnancy, et cetera). If a women goes round having sex with as many men as she can, this is a waste of resources - she's spreading herself too thinly, so to speak. Much better to only have the children of a few highly successful males, invest everything into them - this means her genes are far more likely to survive long-term. For men, it's the other way around. Once they've had sex, that's it - they can leave, and all they spent on the child was courting time and a small amount of protein. Thus having as many children is the most effective course of action, as the cost of making the child isn't borne by him but by the women. The benefit of so many children outweighs the fact that not all of his many offspring will make it to reproduction themselves. Of course, this only explains [i]why[/i] we have these attitudes. It doesn't excuse them. We are sentient, intelligent beings with a broad understanding of emotion, and shouldn't be basing our actions and ideals off instincts from our primitive past.[/quote] My mind is blown dude