NEUROBIOLOGY AND THE QUEERNESS OF KINSHIP 105tors, and genetically modified oxytocin genes, of mice and rat mothers, and
reported the diminishment of expected behaviors toward their young, such
as licking and grooming, nest building, and prolonged feeding (Ferguson
et al. 2000). Conversely, animals whose oxytocin system is upregulated
have been observed to increase such behaviors, and also offer nurturing
to young that aren’t biologically related.^5 Oxytocin is also thought to have
a role in alloparenting (care of nonrelated young) and male attention to
offspring, but research on oxytocin’s role in parenting has overwhelmingly
focused on mother- infant bonds.
Some argue that the participation of oxytocin in maternal bonds is an
effect of evolutionary adaptation. The gene for oxytocin initially ensured
only that females, as Patricia Churchland argues, “had the resources and
motivation to suckle, defend, and more generally, to devote herself to the
welfare of her helpless juveniles until they were independent” (2011, 31).
Through genetic changes, the social role of oxytocin expanded beyond
mother- infant bonds. The modification that “yields caring for others that
are offspring could be further modified, perhaps in quite minor ways, to
yield caring for others that are not offspring, but whose well- being is con-
sequential for the well- being of oneself and one’s offspring” (32). Across
species of mammals, varieties of social arrangements may reflect different
underlying patterns of oxytocin receptors and related circuitry. A strong
view claims that, in humans, these biologically supported attachments are
the scaffolding for all social bonds and for social values (e.g., Young and
Alexander 2012).^6
Many theories of attachment see mother- infant bonds as a touchstone
for all forms of bonding, where the “behavioral building blocks of maternal
affection — gaze, touch, voice, and affect — serve as the basic channels for
the expression of love that underpin any form of human intimacy” (Feld-
man 2012, 383). In one hypothesis, articulated by Churchland (2011) and
Larry Young and Brian Alexander (2012), mothers are neurally wired for af-
fectionate behaviors. Specifically, a maternalized brain underpins maternal
affection. This argument builds on research by Jay Rosenblatt, considered
the “father of the experimental study of maternal behavior,” on the relation
between the maternal hormonal cycle and behavior (Fleming 2007, 8). Ma-
ternalization roughly describes a set of processes that are believed to occur
mainly during pregnancy, parturition, and lactation. During these events,