The obvious theory for different pain sensitivity between men and women is that women need to handle childbirth.
Since that is unique to our species, animal testing probably won't be helpful there.
Since that is unique to our species, animal testing probably won't be helpful there.
What was immediately fascinating to me about this article was the relationship between the immune system and pain sensitivity. Women suffer from autoimmune disorders much more than men because of their stronger immune systems. Makes one wonder if differences in the pain pathways are adaptive to the stronger immune system.
Regarding painful child birth, from an evolutionary perspective it would only matter if the pain itself resulted in less reproduction. The pain is rather fleeting, all things considered, and worst for the first child. And there are many ways for natural selection to mitigate any negative impact on reproduction, such as flooding the woman with hormones that make her forget it, increasing sexual desire, etc.
The interesting part is why this wouldn't result in changes for both men and women. I think the answer is that pain sensitivity is useful, so the evolutionary pressure for men kept it up.
I should say that this is my private speculation. I'm not aware of any established science supporting this, though it might exist.
Much of the animal kingdom has the same issue of painful childbirth. What you mean by "handle", I can only guess. Perhaps something about recovery and a desire repeat.
Do they? As far as I was aware, humans have a uniquely awkward childbirth due to our cranial size.
Human pregnancy is messed up beyond the obvious issue of squeezing our large brain through out narrow running hips.
I don't see anything human-specific here, this would have been true for all placental animals no?