Brains, Sex, and Decisions
I attended all eight of last week’s Nobel Conference lectures. The subject, The Brain and Being Human, offered a multi-faceted look at neuroscience and its applications. (Conference resources are available here and a thought-provoking blog offers specific commentary on the discourse.)
As one presenter explicated, application of neuroscience has gone beyond Science and Medicine. That’s not news. I’ve been using brain research data in teaching for almost ten years. Psychologists and self-help gurus lean on it for evidence. Savvy marketers are studying brain patterns of preference.
Just this morning, on my favorite stationary bike at the Y, with sweat droplets coursing down my forehead into my eyes and vaporizing up my nose on inhale, I read articles in Yoga, AARP, and Sports Illustrated exploring brain chemistry and some aspect of health. Two of the articles talked about the adrenal secretion of cortisol under stress and its effects over time.
You might be interested in knowing sex and exercise are both good for your brain, your memory, and your cortisol levels. They both help prevent Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia.
Why do you think I’m going to the Y six days a week?
I’d have greater benefit and so will you if you do both six times a week. Still looking forward to that. Read on.
My dad took me to my first Nobel conference at Gustavus Adolphus College when I was a sophomore in high school and I’ve been going since. Not every year, but enough years to know there will be something I can take home from the experience even if it’s just a reminder there are really smart people in the world doing really interesting things.
This smart woman is trying to make decisions how precisely to cope with an empty nest and mid-life (I almost choked on that adjective) dating. Further, you know I’ve been doing some very interesting thinking about SEX relative to my values. When last I left that discussion, I had shared the bottom-line guiding principle of “listening to my gut” which I also likened to listening to the Holy Spirit.
That conclusion was not concrete enough for a few people in my close realm who thought I needed to say “I will not have sex outside of marriage.” I bristle at anyone telling me what I need to say. As should any sane adult. On the other hand, I try to remember such comments may come from people who haven’t experienced how well they can trust their own gut.
Some readers were disheartened by the results of the poll which heavily favored a woman in her forties becoming sexual with a decent and good candidate… without imposition of commitment. Again, the poll is of interest, it’s not something I use to guide my behavior.
The conclusion of this post, may (or may not) leave those readers a bit more comforted. Back to Nobel.
Larry Young has been studying prairie voles for sixteen years precisely because they bond for life and remain (mostly) monogamous, one of only a few mammals who do this besides humans. Of course, his work isolates the brain chemistry differences in prairie voles versus other types of voles who do not develop a monogamous bond. The existence of oxytocin and vasopressin in the female and male respectively emerged as primary agents; targeting specific regions of the brain also proved important in the bonding process.
I decided my many foibles in relationships could be linked to an excess of oxytocin, which enhances bonding between mates, between mother and child, and amplifies trust and openness. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the maternal bonding, but I was clearly excessively inundated, (quite naturally because of the way I’m made) with oxytocin.
I was using my brain, Grandma. Just not the logical parts that might have evaluated certain mates as inappropriate. I was being a different kind of smart! I’ve always known I’m not a floozy. I bonded permanently; I married them.
(An aside: Trust Liquid or oxytocin nasal spray IS available on-line. I’m not recommending it. Also, the fact it’s a nasal spray means you’d have to shove it up someone else’s nose in order to get them to trust more. It’s marketed as something you inhale to make others trust you more. Clearly counter-intuitive.)
Another speaker explored the neuroscience of consumer choice by studying the brain activity of decision. I loved Paul Glimcher’s graphics, so vividly depicting a flattened cortex with colored peaks rising from its surface in different regions of the brain during decision-making. Research found choices closest in weight or value by the thinker were the most difficult for researchers to predict.
At some point, brain activity surrounding one of the choices has to overwhelm the other choice. A peak would rise to a certain height, the other sinking to nothing and the choice was made. But if peaks remained nearly equal in height, no choice was made.
The final lecture explored moral responsibility, where research established the symbolic use of language in the decision process as a uniquely human property; the relationship between choice, consequence, imagination, and moral responsibility gathered under one umbrella. I won’t tell you all the particulars of the research, though it is fascinating for those of us who like that kind of thing. I’ll just tell you a story.
About two weeks ago, I went on a pre-birthday shopping date with a girlfriend. I was handling a pair of lovely high-heeled pumps, sometimes crudely referred to as CFM pumps. (If you don’t know what that means, I’m not going to explain it. You’re smart; you can either figure it out, or you’ll intuitively know when you finish the story even if you don’t literally know. Cuz the human brain does stuff like that!)
Looking at the desired object, considering my budget, and fully aware of my current life situation I had two very clear thoughts (using language to help guide my choice) in rapid succession. The first one was “Damn, I wish I had a husband to play with” the second, “OR I wish I were okay playing with a man who isn’t my husband and who isn’t going to be my husband.”
And that, in language, my dear friends, clearly defined my own choice and decision-making process. Here’s what I knew about myself in that moment: 1. I want a husband and 2. I’m not okay playing with a man who doesn’t fit that category.
And there you have it. No way did I expect to have a clear thought about wanting a husband so soon. Seriously, I’ve employed lots of symbolic use of language and expected a thought like that maybe sometime next spring.
But the result of the second thought was most surprising.
I don’t feel unsettled about being without a sexual partner. It’s like the weight of the other option just sunk right back into the cortex of my brain and all the symbolic language about why I don’t want to be sexual right now with any presenting candidates makes perfect weighty sense.
At least that’s true for now. I’ll let you know if it changes.
