{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027888446215139442, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.7, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The father(to)child affiliative bond: Convergent evolution with the canid analogue

Abstract Primate homologues, especially from the African great apes, can usually be successfully utilized to form comparisons with the human condition. However, the man(to)child pairbond is not paralleled by any terrestrial primate nor even many mammals. Hence, knowledge of primate behavior would not be predictive of the pan‐human social father. It is suggested that female choices of mating partners shifted in the direction of a canid analogue in that men's motivations to share resources with the female and to exhibit paternalistic behaviors were positively selected. Accordingly, it is argued that, for humans, convergent evolution occurred which trended toward the canid template. Consequently, it would be predicted that, compared to other terrestrial primates, the neuro‐hormonal basis for the mother‐child affiliative bond would be similar, but the basis for man(to)child affiliative bond would be dissimilar.