It’s simple deductive logic to follow that for a species to survive it must provide it’s offspring with the best possible conditions to ensure it’s survival – either that or to reproduce in such quantity that it ensures survival. The obvious application of this for women is sharing parental investment with the best possible mate her own genetics allow her to attract and who can provide long term security for her and any potential offspring.
Thus women are biologically, psychologically and sociologically the filters of their own reproduction, where as men’s reproductive methodology is to scatter as much of his genetic material as humanly possible to the widest available quantity of sexually available females. He of course has his own criteria for mating selection and determining the best genetic pairing for his reproduction. This is evidenced in our own hormonal biology; men possess between 12 and 17 times the amount of testosterone (the primary hormone in sexual arousal) women do and women produce substantially more estrogen (instrumental in sexual caution) and oxytocin (fostering feelings of security and nurturing) than men.
From a biological point of view, is the bold sentence correct? And is the quantity of hormonal differences the only explanation of this?
Link to article: http://therationalmale.com/2011/08/23/schedules-of-mating/