Neuroscience of Love
Have you ever been in or been around someone in the "honeymoon phase" of a relationship?
That crazy, passionate start where seeing their name pop up on your phone gives you butterflies and you can't help but think about them constantly to the point where it's almost obsessive?
Turns out there's some wild brain chemistry behind those crazy new-love jitters, how love seems to settle as the relationship continues, and what happens in your brain if that relationship ends.
In this episode, we explore:
What scientific theories explain the different types of love
The brain mapping behind passionate love, companion love, and a few more
How your brain changes throughout different relationship phases
What happens in your brain during breakups
What we understand of marriage, monogamy, and human attachment
Whether you're currently falling in love, settled in a long-term relationship, or healing from heartbreak, this episode offers fascinating insights into what's happening in your brain through every stage of love.
If you have any topic suggestions for future episodes, don't hesitate to reach out! Send us an email at info@brainblownpodcast.com.
We'd love to hear from you.
References
Social Neuroscience of Love -- Stephanie Cacioppo, Francesco Bianchi-Demicheli, Elaine Hatfield, Richard L. Rapson
Love: Neuroscience Reveals All -- Larry J. Young
The Power of Love on the Human Brain -- Francesco Bianchi-Demicheli, Scott T. Grafton & Stephanie Ortigue, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
Demystifying the Neuroscience of Love -- Stephanie Cacioppo, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, The University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, USA, John T. Cacioppo
Love is More than Just a Kiss: A Neurobiological Perspective on Love and Affection -- A Deboer, E. M. Vanbuelang, G. J. Terhorst
The Neurobiology of Love -- Tobias Esch & George B. Stefano
The Brain in Love: Has Neuroscience Stolen the Secret of Love? -- Sultan Tarlac
General Outline of Episode
1. Intro & Overview
Have you ever been in or been around someone in the "honeymoon phase" of a relationship? That crazy, passionate start where seeing their name pop up on your phone gives you butterflies and you can't help but think about them constantly to the point where it's almost obsessive? Turns out there's some wild brain chemistry behind those crazy new-love jitters, how love seems to settle as the relationship continues, and what happens in your brain if that relationship ends.
2. Theoretical Foundation
LAINE: I appreciate that this season we are often covering topics that seem so common and familiar, but we get to look at the complexities behind them and what they do to the brain.
Love is a great item for this. Love is something we know we value. To quote Baz Lerman “Love is a many-splended thing. Love lifts us up where we belong. All you need is love!”. Love is the focus of art, music, and poetry. It drives us. The dating industry was valued in 2022 at 9.65 billion and the wedding industry at about 70.5 billion. Clearly, it’s important to us.
But what do we know about it? What goes on in the brain for love? And is all love the same or are the different?
So this is the Neuroscience of Love
Love is not something we often look at under a scientific lens (at least not in my everyday) so lets start there – what exactly is love in neuroscience?
What scientific theories or frameworks explain this issue?
Laine: So starting with scientific theory or framework, let's look at how science has explored the idea love, including to just understanding “what is love”. Is it an emotion? A mental state? A chemical reaction? All of the above? Is it needed for a relationship? A marriage?
Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demichieli, Hatfeild, and Rapson started this question when they looked at the history of this complicated inquiry. They state that for years psychology has been in agreement that love is an emotion, however, neuroscientists decided to come along and complicate this.
Esch and Stefano inquire “What is love? Attachment, commitment, intimacy, passion, grief upon separation, and jealousy are but a few of the emotionally loaded terms used to describe that which love represents. In science, however, love appears to be a hypothetical and multi-dimensional construct with many interpretations and implications”.
State Bianchi-Demicheli, Grafton, and Ortigue argue “Intense romantic love is defined as a complex state involving erotic, cognitive, chemical, and goal-directed behavioral components.”. They show as an example that when we are involved in a romantic, passionate, and intimate relationship, we strive for the happiness of our loved ones and that we will think about our loved one over 85% of their waking hours! They report this also comes alongside “euphoria, loss of appetite, hyperactivity, delay of the onset of fatigue, and a decreased need for sleep”.
Caciooppo states that the feeling of love can have a lot of definitions, however scientifically “love is defined as a complex mental state involving basic and complex emotions as well as cognitive, rewarding, and goal-directed behavioral components”. They also state that each subtype does have its own definition, and shows different brain interactions. (Hatfield & Rapson, 2009).
Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demichieli, Hatfeild and Rapson finally come to the conclusion by arguing “Love carries many definitions, but the one used here is the existence of an emotional state involving chemical, cognitive, rewarding and goal-directed behavioral components…specifically charcterized by a motivated and goal-directed mental state (Hatfield & Sprecher 1986, Hatfield & Rapson 2009).
So what is love? It is emotion but it is also a chemical reaction followed by a thought process, often repetitive, hitting the reward and pleasure areas of the brain while also forcing the brain into a cost/benefit looking at long-term rewards.
What happens in the brain during this process?
LAINE: -Honestly this one is difficult to give an overview on, as what is firing in the brain does in fact, depend on what kind of love someone is feeling, but I will say it shares some strong similarities to obsessive-compulsive disorder, and/or addiction.
3. Brain Mapping (Deep Dive)
Laine: So as we mentioned, different types of love show different reactions in the brain. So we will need to define some of those first. Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst state “Psychologists have defined three different phases in romantic relationships: “Being in Love,” “Passional Love,” and “Companionate love” and define them as follows:
Phase 1 is Being in love. They state “ “Being in love” is the first phase in a relationship. This phase is characterized by high passion, a rapid rise in intimacy, and increased commitment. This phase lasts relatively short, usually around half a year. Love during this phase is about excitation and stress. Stress is caused by insecurity and can lead to mood changes.
So the honeymoon phase
Phase 2 is Passionate Love. They state “After several months to a year the initial phase of euphoria, excitation, and stress evolves into a phase of “passional love”, which is dominated by feelings of safety, calm, and balance”. They state that passion will still be high, however now intimacy and investment continue to increase steadily. Stress starts to decrease.
“Committed relationship”?
Third phase is “Companionate love”. They argue that a relationship usually lasts several years before evolving into companionate love. They characterize this phase by a decrease in passion, however, intimacy and commitment remain high, and state “the love relationship in this phase is quite similar to friendships.”. They do also clarify that not all relationships obviously follow this course, as many end earlier and they specifically state that “the transition from passional love to companionate love is a particularly fragile period in a relationship.”
I first think of older age being a factor here, we’re well past the family-planning phase here that may require some more “passion” and what not, moving to contentment with each other’s company?
So what is going on in the brain during all of this? And how is this different from other types of love.
Being in love and Passionate Love:
Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demicheli, Hatfeild and Rapson state that passionate love shows increased activity in the subcortical brain areas of the ventral tegmental area, caudate nucleus, and the putamen. These are areas that are associated with euphoria, reward, and motivation. We also see our old friend dopamine sliding into those dm’s of this area, causing the body to feel rewarded, positive and motivated experience. Also to note quote “Most of these regions were those that are active when people are under the influence of euphoria-inducing drugs such as opiates or cocaine.
Apparently, both passionate love and those drugs activate a “blissed-out” circuit in the brain”. Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst state “In many ways, love can feel like an addiction, and the dopaminergic pathways that are involved in love and pair bond formation are largely similar to those that are in volved in addictive behavior”. Blink states: “You see someone, you click, and you’re euphoric. And in response, your ventral tegmental area uses chemical messengers such as dopamine, serotonin, and oxytocin to send signals racing to a part of the brain called the nucleus accumbens with the good news, telling it to start craving”. And not only do you start craving a person, but our cranky middle child who always ruins the fun…yeah that’s essentially deactivated. So we are on a high, with no fear. Also, there is deactivation in certain areas besides just the amygdala. The prefrontal region, the parieto-temporo occipital region, and the temporo-parietal region. This is important for visualization, intention and decision-making and logical deduction. “It is the source of logic and adherence to social rules, morality and respect. The reduction in the activity of this region in people in love results in a weakening or loss of its functions. This is possible because the brain regions responsible for logic and the rules of social morality have stopped working properly.
”Bianchi-Demicheli, Grafton, and Ortigue remind us that when someone is feeling intense passionate love, we also struggle with regulation of things like loss of appetite, hyperactivity, delay of the onset of fatigue, and a decreased need for sleep. “In particular, intense romantic love mainly activates brain regions with a high concentration of receptors for dopamine and a related agent, norepinephrine, i.e., the chemical messengers closely tied to states of euphoria, craving, addiction, heightened attention, or sleeplessness.” Sultan Tarlaci states there is also decreased pain, “an increase in the pulse rate, palpitations, sweating, trembling, intestinal activity, and an increase in stomach acidity and the rate of swallowing.
Over the ages, these physiological responses have made people think that the heart was the instrument of falling in love.” Talarci also states the importance of dopamine, specifically in the ventral tegmental area which we became very familiar with on the neuroscience of addiction in season 2. Tarlaci states “ The Ventral tegmental area, along with the substantiva nigra, is the source of 90% of the dopamine in the brain. Because of this region’s richness in dopamine, it is active in all reward stimuli. In addition, it contributes to wakefulness, attention, increased libido, motivation, and reward-seeking. The basic function of dopamine is the “want” in the reward system. At the same time, dopamine is closely associated with novelty-seeking and creativity. It is the source of reiterative thought and behavior. It is dopamine which causes poets to write poetry when they are in love, and musicians to make music.” Stating “In brief, when people in love see their beloved, they fall into an ocean of dopamine in the reward pathways in their subcortical structures.”
Along with dopamine we also have serotonin, but not how you might think we do. Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst state “in early stages of romantic love, there is a depletion of serotonin levels” and state “Depletion of central serotonin is also found in several psychiatric disorders, including obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression, and anxiety disorders.” They go on to clarify stating “early stages of romantic love show similarities to OCD, including symptoms of anxiety, stress, and obtrusive thinking.” and stating platelet levels are the same, and post-treatment normalize. Also stating “Passionate love is an obsession, and from the point of view of serotonin chemistry it lasts around 12 18 months.”
So now we are high and addicted and a little obsessive. But even though our amygdala is off, love isn’t always calming. It turns out we are pretty stressed in the early stages of romantic love. Specifically, Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst show that “In early-stage romantic love, the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis activity is increased,” but only for about six months and it will decrease in about a year or so. They state “Besides the well-known euphoric feelings in early romantic love, falling in love is also accompanied by increased levels of stress and insecurity about the beginning of the relationship. This observation of increased stress is supported by evidence of elevated cortisol levels”
So now we are high, addicted, obsessive and stressed out. Oh and also blind. Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst also state that love does kinda make us blind. Specifically noting changes in the frontal cortex. That is an area involved in the experience of negative emotions and judgment. They state “The common observation that people who are in love are not able to honestly judge their lover’s character, might thus be influenced by altered activity in this brain area. Other areas implicated in love are the prefrontal cortex, temporal poles, and parietotemporal junction. These areas are involved in mentalizing and Theory of Mind“.
So now we are high, addicted, obsessive, stressed out and blind to faults. Oh and also stupid. Sultan Tarlaci states “When you’re in love, the rules of logic aren’t applied. Love comes in, and sense goes out the window. It is for this reason that people in love tend to take stupid and illogical risks”. Stating because of these brain changes, specifically in the parieto-temporo occipital region we are able to be as persuaded by people trying to make us see sense”.
On a more positive note additional activity in the brain is also shown in our insula and anterior cingulate cortex, specifically thought to be around mediating emotion, body sensation integration, and processing that reward feeling. Additionally your insula and the anterior cingulate cortex “have also been shown to become active when people view sexually arousing material”. Which, if you think about it, makes sense, as passionate love and arousal are often thought to go hand and hand.
There is more still firing here, as we do have some “higher-order cortical brain areas” specifically our “occipitotemporal/fusiform region, angular gyrus, dorsolateral middle frontal gyrus, superior temporal gyrus, occipital cortex, and precentral gyrus” which are areas of the brain areas involved in social cognition, attention, memory, mental associations, and self representation.
Also we will see some areas that change from the beginning stages of intense passionate love or lust, to reduce as time goes on. As we mentioned changes to stress and serotonin as well as Nerve Growth Factors (that is a protein that plays a critical role in the development, survival, and function of neurons and is involved in activating the HPA axis) and Testosterone which we’ve covered before which is connected to social aggression, defense, and arousal. As well as a decrease in cortisol stating “long-term relationships tend to decrease stress levels and increase feelings of security, accounting for a decrease in stress hormone levels and perhaps attributing to some of the health benefits of long-term relationships”. Esch and Stefano state “Thus, love seems to be a complex phenomenon and, with regard to stress, an ambiguous experience, i.e., a double-edged sword: Love itself can stressful, but it potentially serves to lower stress levels over the long term.”
What this in total shows is passionate love activates areas of the brain that are involved in basic emotions, as well as reward or motivation, but “also recruits brain regions involved in complex cognitive processing”. But it also deactivates our fear and sense of logic and reasoning.
Love verses Lust:
Cacioppo states “the posterior insula was significantly more activated by feelings of lust (than passionate love), whereas the anterior insula was significantly more activated by feelings of passionate love (than lust).”
Companion Love:
Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demicheli, Hatfeild and Rapson state “Companion love is defined as being less intense” Specifically we see more feelings of “calm, social comfort, emotional union, and the security felt in the presence of a long-term mate”. We have some separation anxiety when we are not as close, and engage in friendly actions that promote social bonds and a willingness to participate in shared chores. The studies we have are largely animal-based and what we see is “oxytocin and vasopressin in the nucleus accumbens and ventral pallidum”. But state we need further studies on the human brain for this to be confirmed. As mentioned in companion love we see some brain changes. Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demicheli, Hatfeild, and Rapson state “Activity related to the length of the relationship was found in the right insula, the right cingulate cortex, and the right posterior cingulated/retrospenial cortex”.
Maternal love:
Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst state there have been many studies to understand where parental love is different than romantic love. There is some overlap, specifically in the dopamine reward system and the pattern of brain deactivations is also similar. Zeki states “These observations support the hypothesis that the adult attachment system evolved from the infant–caregiver attachment system” which we cover in season one on the neuroscience of relationships. We do see some significant differences, not surprising. Bartles, Zeki, and Fisher state a big difference is activation in the hypothalamus. This is specifically activated in both romantic love and sexual arousal, but not in maternal love. Zeki also states “Another difference is that in maternal love strong activation was found in areas specific for face recognition and facial expressions” which suggested that the activation for maternal but not romantic love “can be attributed to the evolutionary necessity for mothers to read their children’s facial expressions, to assure their well-being.”
Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demicheli, Hatfeild, and Rapson state that there is an activity in the insula, and in the anterior cingulate cortex. These are also active in passionate love. They specifically look at activation in the periaqueductal gray area noting a “specific activation of periaqueductal gray area was observed in maternal (but not passionate) love only”. Specifically, they are also looking at how the periaqueductal gray area having a high density of vasopressin, specifically important in maternal boding stating “On the other hand, these findings also suggest that PAG is not specifically activated during maternal love only. Rather, PAG is activated for both maternal love and unconditional love, which makes sense given that mothers often feel unconditional love for their child/children
Paternal love:
Cacioppo, Bianchi-Demicheli, Hatfeild, and Rapson state that we do process paternal love someone differently. Specifically, their research shows “a differential processing for mother’s faces and father’s faces” specifically in areas associated with face and recognition. For mother’s faces, we process that in core and extended brain regions associated with this but for fathers we process it in the caduet nucleus. And note comparing fathers to celebrity males, noting “when compared to celebrity males, no significant difference in activity was found between father’s faces and faces of unknown males”.
All love:
Acevedo et al. report that we do see activity across the board, specifically in the “VTA and caudate” which is involved in romantic love but also love for the self and has corriations with friendship love.
For all love, it should come as no surprise that we see a high level of oxytocin and vasopressin. Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst state “Oxytocin and vasopressin have consistently been implicated in pair-bonding and love” And we are talking about the brain but it is important to note that oxytocin resorts are in your kidneys, pituitary, and cardiovascular system and your brain. Also of note oxytocin and vasopressin do have opposite impacts on the brain, specifically, oxytocin is regulating abut vasopressin increases fear and stress. This interaction with dopamine on a reward system and can induce the release of dopamine, which is likely one of the things that started researchers on is this more than an emotion, as dopamine is connected to rewards, drive, motivation, etc.
Breakups:
The reality is most relationships do not last forever and can often feel very stressful, specifically we do see an increase in stress hormones. Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst state “ we also found an increased activity in the ventral tegmental area, ventral striatum, pallidum, and putamen in individuals experiencing a romantic relationship breakup”. These are active when we have ‘uncertian rewards’, as in we are trying to do the right thing for the right outcome but it feels less guaranteed, causing uncertain feelings about the future. We also see “parts of the orbitofrontal cortex were activated, which is associated with Theory of Mind and implementing appropriate adjustments in behavior, but have also been found to be activated in obsessive-compulsive behaviors and in anger control” Specifically Najib et al. found deactivation of most of these areas. So essentially when we break up we are stressed, struggle to understand the person's perspective, struggle to act appropriately, can act obsessive, and struggle with anger regulation. We also see activity in areas similar to those found in individuals with major depression. This shows “a close relationship between grief and depression and that the grieving period following a romantic relationship breakup might be a major risk factor for clinical depression.”
Love is a many complex thing. Love lifts us up where we are high off it. Love is way more than an emotion and it turns out you need more than just love to function.
Researchers state after all that, simply put, love is a goal-directed state that causes us to feel various emotions instead of an emotion without any reward or motivated behavior.
4. Practical Application (Strategies & Takeaways)
So I keep wondering - what does all this brain stuff actually tell us about marriage? Like, if our brains go through these chemical changes when we fall in love and then again when we settle into long-term relationships, does that mean we're actually built for marriage? Is it in our wiring to stay with one person forever?
As we remember from Season 1, our brains can have variations that will impact the way that we connect to others. Specifically, if we are raised in a high nurturing environment, this increases the amount of oxytocin receptors we have, causing us to experience a higher dopamine reward for love, which increases connection, nurturing and staying in a relationship. Young specifically found that “A recent study shows that men with a particular AVPR1A variant are twice as likely as men without it to remain unmarried, or when married, twice as likely to report a recent crisis in their marriage. Spouses of men with the variant also express more dissatisfaction in their relationships than do those of men lacking it.”. So chemicals matter. Young also states “ The stimulation of the cervix and nipples during sexual intimacy are potent releasers of brain oxytocin, and may function to strengthen the emotional tie between partners.
Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst remind us that love is a part of the adult attachment system, so our attachment to our parents impacts our relationships, as we covered in season one. They also inquire if humans are monogamous by nature. They state that what they often see is that either monogamous or serial monogamous attachments is evolved in regards to the need to care for an offspring. So in many species, what we see is bonding is often for the length of the breeding season, though some species have lifelong attachments. However, in humans, this has been a high debate, as the divorce rates are at or exceeding 50%. Kleinman states there is a ‘four-year itch theory’, stating that “human adult pair-bonds are formed for approximately four years, the period in which the offspring is most vulnerable” and suggests that “the human mating system is one of serial monogamy, not life-long attachments”, stating it more closely resembles other serial monogamous animal who bond for only a breeding season, stating “the only difference is that the duration for the offspring to become independent is much longer for humans than for lower mammals.” In support of Fisher’s theory, she also found that the four-year time window could be extended to about seven years if the couple has more than one child, demanding longer cooperation of the parents in the care for the second child.”
And Tarluci might argue for nonmonogamy to be more overall healthy for the brain, as evidence shows that its likely rejuvenating. Asking “Does Love Rejuvenate the Brain?” and looking at how this increase of dopamine from love fuels are but also states “The main neurotrophic factor which keeps the brain young is neuron growth factor (NGF)” which is very high (almost double) when we are in love, but only lasts a short period of time. (Levi-Montalcini, 1996; Marazziti, 2004; 2003). Also stated, “NGF levels in the long-term lovers were found to have fallen to 45% of that of the passionate lovers in their first six months, and were even below that of normal people”. And specifically, this matters because “NGF is essential for the life of neurons and dendritic growth….It increases their myelinisation, speeds up healing and has aniogenic (forming new blood vessels) properties.”
Deboer, Vanbuelandg, Terhorst also state “There are several indications for human nonmonogamy. Outside of the low feelings of long-term marital satisfaction and high divorce rate. The brain change we might feel potentially increases the likelihood of ending relationships after a few years. “Suggesting that humans are not naturally inclined to form life-long attachments. Furthermore, comparing humans with other species showed that on several points … humans are more similar to nonmonogamous species than to monogamous species”. They argue that we do show too many qualities of social monogamy, “including enduring pair-bonds and co-operation in raising offspring, to conclude that humans are completely nonmonogamous” Specifically they state that it is possible that humans are “are evolutionary programmed to be serial monogamous, showing high levels of social monogamy without being sexual monogamous”. Stating “it seems unlikely that humans are naturally inclined to be sexually monogamous, and human pair-bonds seem not to be made for eternity. However, human monogamy is still a sensitive topic and many people would not share this opinion. A complicating factor is that culture also plays an important role in human sexual behavior, and it is difficult to separate this cultural effect from human nature.”
Think that’s weird. We thought weirder. Once upon a time we didn’t think love was important for marriage. Originally according to Deboer, Vanbuelands and Terhorse “Romantic love was seen as a main factor for“family disorganization,” and thus, it should be suppressed to keep stability within the family. As research focused on how to keep families together and prevent marital dissatisfaction,conflict-solving studies prevailed, believing that this was the key to long and happy marriage. However, these early 20th-century investigators might have been wrong because recent studies indicate that conflict situations within marriage and satisfaction with marriage are two largely unrelated factors. Instead, signs of positive affect (eye contact, cuddling, positive remarks about each other, etc.)are more important for marital satisfaction, and the absence of positive affect is probably a better predictor of marital problems than conflicts (Hustonetal.,2001).
Culture changes over time, which changes our way of thinking, which impacts our sense of value. We are constantly evolving and constantly growing. What is seen as a norm one day is not the same the next.
5. Closing & Recap
So what does all this mean? What do we do with this? We started this podcast really on the idea that knowing is a key component to understanding. I was honestly worried about presenting the findings for this episode…because as you noticed it didn’t necessarily paint love in the kindest light, let alone loving relationships. And that begs the question - is that part of it? Is love something we want to be a mystery?
Something that feels better not to know or understand.
But if you made it this far in the episode, you have apparently decided to learn about love, even though its not necessarily pretty.
So let's take it for what it is. We have discussed a lot on this podcast about the evolution of humans, and how that wires us today. How empathy exists because we wanted bigger brains, so we stood up, which shorted a birth canal, which meant we were given a big head to push out of a small funnel. So, as humans, our babies are far less underdeveloped. And because of that, plus a shorted intestinal track from standing up, we needed to connect to one another so we didn’t die out. So we have neural wirings that make our ears try to pick out the human voice. We have a dopamine release that happens when we feed a baby that is higher then when we feed ourselves, even if its not our baby. We have a ton of neuro responses and connections between mother and child because something had to keep us from not just dropping the kid into the jungle after the third time screaming at 3 am and saying ‘forget this’. We are wired to live. Our brains don’t want us to be happy, they want us to survive. And they want us to connect with others. And they want us to procreate. That has some solid scientific backing, even if its not romantic.
So love makes us blind to faults. It gives a serious high that is only comparable to some really intense drugs. It makes us not sleep and not eat, and write bad poetry and obsess and feel withdrawal when we are away from someone. It makes us kinda stupid. For about four to seven years. And then, even after six months, the brain starts to change again. This episode is fascinating this season because this season is about how we are not the same people and how we change depending on who we are around. And in this case, we change even though we are with the same person. Your brain, for the same reason it gives you happy brain chemicals to make 3 am feeding easier, gives you an overdose so you procreate and connect to raise a child together. But humans aren’t perfect and we don’t always like putting up with them. So it sometimes requires some extra chemicals so we put up with someone, so we want to. So we won’t be so picky and overlook every fault (for about four to seven years). So we will have an inherent drive to connect and make babies.
And that doesn’t mean we have to.
What is big on this is knowing means we get to respond to our brain chemicals, or not. But what is helpful is when you know how your brain is responding, you get to choose. And yes, we have a good amount of data to show that humans are not actually monogamous, and we don’t mate for life, but again what it means is you get to choose.
And perhaps, also not judge. Not judge yourself, not judge others.
There have been other communities, other practices around love and relationships. Again monogamous marriage is new to human society honestly. Many millieana ago in one tribe it was thought that a woman should procreate with as many men as possible so the baby would get the best genes. In what we think of as more biblical times, it shifted to more of a patriarchal viewpoint and it was thought of to have many wives so you could have many sons.
We have redefined this many times over the year. Our norm has not always been our norm and it might not always be our norm. And perhaps that is important.
We have discussed that children require four regulatory partners at any given time to achieve the best possible outcomes. We used to be able to do that in tribes, and then in villages, and then in extended families. None of that is our norm anymore. Perhaps not having monogamy be forced onto people opens up better options to not have overworked, underslept, stressed parents.
There are communities and people who currently practice what is referred to as ethical non-monogamy. This is not the same as polygamy, which is having many wives, but instead, can we look at multiple relationships so that all people have the same level of power and consent? And there are tricks to it. In ethical non-monogamy adding a new relationship means just what we’ve covered today - that your brain gets soaked in chemicals. And what does that mean for your existing relationships when your brain is on a chemical high? To be ethical about it, you need to think of the needs of all people. Ethical non-monogamy or EMN or a few other terms that are used actually do have a name for this. It is called NRE or new relationship energy. And just like to practice ethical non-monogamy one must work through jealousy and fear and communication and scheduling, but they must also be aware that the brain gets soaked in chemicals and we don’t respond the same way. It means owning it and then deciding what's next.
So what if all relationships, monogamous or otherwise were aware of that? That we will have the beginning of a relationship where we can not be without someone, where we feel on a high, where all we want is to just be close to that someone, and A) we have to be adults and go to work and sleep and be responsible anyway but also B) it's short lasting. And in a few years, you will start to see someone’s fault. In four years your relationship might start to struggle. Because your brain has changed.
And that means, you now get to decide what you want to do next. Because yes our brain fires a certain way, but our mind does exist. And when we can own what is going on, we get to decide what we want to do about it.
Perhaps what should matter is that we look at all relationships have value. All people have value. And love needs to be about consent, true consent, to engage in this many splendid thing. Faults and all.
