Talk:Tend and befriend

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Physiology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Evolutionary biology Low‑importance

	Evolutionary biology portal This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Social affiliation

I suggest that the term Social affiliation would be a more general and encyclopedic term. In the meantime, I have created a redirect page, and linked to it from the Affiliation disambig page. RichardVeryard (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding controversial tag and controversy section due to this theory's basis in evolutionary psychology. This theory exhibits some of the worse tendencies towards gender determinism displayed by that field.

Badly sourced

The article contains few sources. Many assertions are unsourced, and references to pseudoscience (Polyvagal theory) used as evidence. 178.3.49.25 (talk) 20:49, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is baloney

"Tend and befriend" is one of many evo-psych claims that runs completely counter to how male and female behaviors actually operate in non-western societies. There is no evidence that the supposed greater female tendency towards coalition building or friendship seen in western culture is universal, and in fact serious anthropological research tends to point in the other direction: in most non-western and especially tribal cultures, men are more gregarious, form larger coalitions and maintain denser within-gender solidarity networks than women. This is a pure example of how sloppy and poorly-produced research based on a priori assumptions (and sometimes flat out lies) is rewarded by the low standards of the evo-psych snake oil pseudoscience fraud. I don't even think this article deserves to exist, period. Traditional Culture Preservation Society (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"and in fact serious anthropological research tends to point in the other direction: in most non-western and especially tribal cultures, men are more gregarious, form larger coalitions and maintain denser within-gender solidarity networks than women"

Care to present this research? 102.42.224.65 (talk) 18:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The work of Joyce Benenson comes to mind. It's honestly embarrassing that we are still having these conversations about "male responses" and "female responses" in the post-Cordelia Fine world, anyway. 76.38.21.67 (talk) 02:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am the same person as the account above ("Traditional Culture Preservation Society"). I took the liberty of rewriting much of this article to reflect the actual cross-cultural data. Hope this sparks some useful conversations from the "nature side" of the debate.JRBusk (talk) 15:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you and i agree and i did add some few more studies supporting the nurture side 197.58.169.53 (talk) 19:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]