> That’s always been the case. Has it? The question is not if people change. The question is who they choose and why - now, versus before. > There’s always a

> That’s always been the case. Has it? The question is not if people change. The question is who they choose and why - now, versus before. > There’s always a transactional aspect to being in a relationship. Are you good looking enough, healthy enough, wealthy enough, well connected enough, emotionally connected, personality etc. That doesn't explain the decrease in sex. As a group people are supposedly still about the same. > It may not be fruitful to frame a relationship exclusively in those pros and cons terms, but that’s the way nature has always worked. If we talk about humans, the article talks about the changing data. The proposed explanation is that views have changed. You're saying that views always have been like that. So there is a difference in data.