Letters to the Editor
-
ANS and marriage
Kennicott’s essay does seem particularly insightful (as well as kind to Ms. Smith in contextualizing her choices) as does Ms. Clark-Flory’s addition that the “sexual economy” of marriage is ultimately understood in terms of underlying biological drives: about survival, procreation, and the features of mating systems and behavior which further those needs.
As long as opportunities to gain resources needed for a secure and meaningful life are differentially available to the sexes, women and men will both suffer. The greater the opportunity for women to independently support themselves and gain control and resources, the less likely they will relate to men with calculation and cynical self-interest. The very drives and traits which men seem afraid to relinquish because they are unconsciously associated with mate attraction (competitive acquisition and control of power, status and resources) undermine the potential for men and women to freely relate to each other, and undermine the true security that might result from attraction, attachment and bonding free of calculation, sexual economy, and thus of anxiety and mistrust.