They asked a group of volunteers a series of questions about their relationships and "men with the 334 version of the AVPR1A gene earned lower scores from their partner/wife for strength of relationship bond. They were also less likely to be married. If they were married, they were more likely to have experienced marital problems."
My problem isn't even so much the fact that this is an 'excuse' for having problems with monogomy, which seems like a moot point considering some of the men studied clearly have decided to marry despite their genetic predisposition - and are now finding that life difficult. My problem is the implication that this is some kind of Pyrrhic victory for women, that we should say 'Of course! How convenient! But my, that explains a lot!' as we put yet another bridal gown back on the rail. It all reinforces ideas about the things men and women actually want - that men want to be fancy-free and women want to ensnare them to 50 years of unwavering monogamy.
In my experience, men (or at least young men) are much, much more interested in commitment and settling down than young women. I keep saying it, but no one seems to quite believe me. I find myself surrounded by male friends either keen to hang onto their independent, educated other halves or desperate to marry them and start a family. Many more of my male friends than female ones got married in the last five years (if you see what I mean). It really irritates me that men are still painted as 'naturally' wild-oat sowing cavemen, and I can only assume it irritates a lot of guys, too. What are other people's experience of this?
