Social assumptions often collapse every close connection between a man and a woman into something sexual. For people recovering from trauma, these assumptions are not only inaccurate — they are damaging. From a neuroscience and mental-health perspective, here’s why these judgments completely miss the mark.
1. The Brain Separates Bonding From Sexual Intent
Neuroscience shows that attachment circuitry and sexual-arousal circuitry are not the same:
• Attachment Network
Involves the anterior cingulate cortex, prefrontal cortex, oxytocin and vasopressin systems.
Its purpose: safety, trust, emotional soothing, co-regulation.
• Sexual Arousal Network
Involves the hypothalamus, amygdala, nucleus accumbens.
Its purpose: reproduction, reward seeking, physical desire.
These circuits can overlap, but they are completely capable of functioning independently.
So, two people can share:
- deep conversation
- emotional safety
- companionship
- laughter
- mutual support
…without activating sexual pathways at all. That’s normal, common, and biologically recognised.
2. Trauma Recovery Requires Safe, Non-Sexual Human Connection
After trauma (especially relationship or domestic abuse), the nervous system is in hypervigilance, constantly scanning for threat.
Neuroscience calls this threat bias.
What reduces it? Not sex — safe presence.
Opposite-sex friendships can:
- stabilise the amygdala
- calm the sympathetic nervous system
- increase prefrontal control
- release oxytocin in a non-romantic, non-sexual way
These changes rebuild a traumatised brain’s capacity for trust.
Judging these relationships ignores the biology of healing.
3. Social Judgement Is Often Projection, Not Science
People who insist that “if a man and a woman are close, they must be having sex” tend to rely on:
• Cognitive Bias
Their brains assume their own patterns of relating are “universal”.
This is literally called projection bias in behavioural neuroscience.
• Moralisation of Ambiguity
The brain dislikes not knowing what a relationship means.
So it invents a story (usually wrong) to reduce uncertainty.
• Fear-Based Thinking
Some people locked in unhealthy or stagnant relationships attack what they don’t understand.
Their judgement says more about their neural wiring (threat response → judgement → certainty-seeking) than about the friendships themselves.
In other words: their brain is trying to regulate their discomfort, not describe your reality.
4. Friendship Across Sexes Is Normal in a Modern Social Brain
Evolutionary psychology shows that cooperative, non-sexual relationships between men and women have existed for thousands of years — for survival, social stability, and emotional wellbeing.
Modern neuroscience confirms that the human brain thrives with:
- multiple attachment figures
- diverse social bonds
- platonic intimacy
- emotional variety
Sex is not a prerequisite for any of these.
5. Why These Judgements Are Harmful (Especially After Abuse)
When someone assumes every opposite-sex friendship is sexual, they:
• Re-trigger shame circuits in the trauma brain
Shame activates the same neural pathways as physical pain.
• Reinforce dangerous patriarchal “ownership” ideas
This is psychologically toxic, especially to survivors.
• Undermine trauma recovery
Safe friendships become targets for gossip or policing.
• Misinterpret healthy behaviour as deviant
A stable support network is a sign of recovery, not risk.
From a scientific standpoint, the judgement is irrational.
From a trauma standpoint, it is harmful.
From a moral standpoint, it is none of their business.
6. A More Accurate, Neuroscience-Aligned View
A traumatised brain needs:
- co-regulation
- trust
- stability
- community
- safety
Opposite-sex friendships can provide these without involving — or even hinting at — sex.
A narrow-minded observer may not understand this. That does not make it any less valid, healthy, or necessary.
Their assumptions are social noise.
Your healing is biological fact.
