Brain researchers have no doubts: that is why the couple is a brilliant idea

Love in the brain

For centuries, experts have wildly disagreed about what the natural form of cohabitation for humans is.

But according to Michael Winterdahl, there is no doubt that we are programmed to seek the relationship.

Our brains reward us with large amounts of oxytocin – also known as the love hormone – when we bond with another human being.

It doesn’t happen because society expects it from us.

The vast majority

– It’s a strong mechanism, and it applies regardless of your sexuality and regardless of the type of cohabitation you’re in. It’s pure biology, explains Michael Winterdahl.

It is therefore not the love hormone alone that makes the couple the preferred family form.

– And there is nothing wrong with living in a different way, but most people will probably end up in a relationship. Romantically, we bond with one person at a time, says Michael Winterdahl.

Some prefer life as a single person, but the population survey Project SEXUS revealed that the vast majority of single Danes dream of the twosome.

They have a much better reason for this than the desire to live up to the standards.

– We choose the relationship because it works. The relationship is extremely good at ensuring the survival and success of children, and that’s all it’s about. At least biologically, says Michael Winterdahl.

Nature is unfair

– Nature is deeply unfair. Having children is a huge, huge investment for women. For men, the biological investment in the form of a sperm cell is minimal, points out Michael Winterdahl.

This means that the woman basically has only one option: To invest in the children she gives birth to. Therefore, for the woman, it is all about finding the right man with the right genes.

– For men, it can be a strategy to bet on many women. Or invest a lot in a few women and very little in others, Michael Winterdahl continues.

But it is an uncertain strategy.

Relationship vs. polygamy

– If the children are to cope, time must be invested in them. It happens automatically for women, but also makes sense for men.

– Virtually all civilizations have independently agreed on this. There are really only two strategies that have gained traction: Monogamy and polygamy. That means couples and polygamy, explains Michael Winterdahl.

The couple relationship beats polygamy.

– There are now roughly the same number of men and women, so polygamy results in a large group of men without wives. It can work stably for a few years, but requires repression, because the men will fight to get the opportunity to pass their genes on, and it often ends in something really ugly. One-to-one relationships are more stable, both for the individual and for society.

Who is the father?

The goal of fidelity in the relationship is not about religion or restrictive social norms either.

– The man must know he is the father of the children, otherwise he will not invest time and energy in them, says Michael Winterdahl.

Or so it once was.

Today it is said that the father has become redundant. You can easily raise children without a husband.

– Still, studies show that children of divorce do worse on a wide range of parameters, points out Michael Winterdahl.

Fathers and Heirs

One need only look at the line of kings to find evidence of the importance of the relationship between fathers and sons. The line of kings goes much further back in time than the arrival of Christianity in Denmark.

Some of our oldest written sources show that fathers and their heirs were important even before Christianity replaced our pagan faith: Harald Blåtand, who Christianized Denmark, set his Jellingsten in memory of his father and mother. Archive photo: Palle Hedemann/Ritzau Scanpix

The couple relationship is therefore an ancient invention. Side jump as well.

Over time, several Danish kings have been famous for a multitude of “illegitimate” children. But it was the children of the official wife who spoke, both for king and commoner.

Women have cheated too, and not always just for fun.

– When a couple has not been able to have children, it has happened that the man has looked the other way, while his wife went somewhere else, to secure him an heir, says Marlena Haue, museum inspector and archaeologist at the Vendsyssel Historical Museum.

No evidence

– Father and mother and family exist as far back as we have written sources. Further back, there is no evidence of the relationship. But as far as I know, there is no archaeological evidence for anything else either, says Marlena Haue.

There are double graves with remains of presumed couples. And remains of houses from the Bronze Age and Stone Age.

– In terms of size, the houses seem as if a mother and father lived there with some children and grandparents, explains Marlena Haue.

– I think you have protected the family and that you have basically stuck to one partner, even if some have been loose on the thread. Men may not have been interested in feeding five children from another man. And single mothers with young children have not had much chance of survival, since young children cannot be left behind as young animals while the mother goes in search of food. Relationships and fidelity gave the best chance for the children to survive, Marlena Haue also believes.