OneDullExistence
@OneDullExistence
12 Years
Comments: 0 · Posts: 69 · Topics: 1
Cheating is natural.. but only for men.
You are on page out of 2 | Reverse Order
Females carry the offspring around for X months which means they cannot get pregnant again for X amount of time, and since mother nature has not designed us to have sex for fun but rather on instinct, their biological responsibility becomes the nesting - while males on the other hand can run around oversexed and spread their semen all they want. In fact that's THEIR biological responsibility, that and protecting their offspring from outsiders. That's usually how it goes, though nature does make exceptions for some species.
Anyway, none of this justifies cheating - after all, we are more than our instincts - but don't tell me men and women are programmed the same because we all know it's simply not true. Any biologist without an agenda will tell you that. Nor is the gender a social construction. There are social constructions no question about it, but they are a result of our biological construction(s).
There you have it, mother nature in all its glorious simplicity. 🙂
Anyway, none of this justifies cheating - after all, we are more than our instincts - but don't tell me men and women are programmed the same because we all know it's simply not true. Any biologist without an agenda will tell you that. Nor is the gender a social construction. There are social constructions no question about it, but they are a result of our biological construction(s).
There you have it, mother nature in all its glorious simplicity. 🙂
Why do we human beings think that we stand above nature. We are the civilized animal, sure... but we're still animals.
And nature has no name for sexism.
Yeah that's what I was talking about when I said "there are exceptions". But it's funny to me how people always choose to bring up those few exceptions instead of looking at the general picture. I mean even within these monogamous societies, cheating would be almost a necessity if the invovled parties could actually experience intimacy on an emotional level the way the human animal does.
And I gotta say, with all the things that seperates us from other animals, such as enjoying the full spectra of sensations involved in the dating and mating ritual, we have all the more reason to cheat! In fact it's almost pushed upon us... 😐
And I gotta say, with all the things that seperates us from other animals, such as enjoying the full spectra of sensations involved in the dating and mating ritual, we have all the more reason to cheat! In fact it's almost pushed upon us... 😐
@NovemberSun. Btw most of the animals/insects you mention - if not all? - are not even mammals. It kind of puts things in perspective even more as far as I'm concerned - I mean we are mammals and logically, we would probably not have the same biological coding as let's say a bed-bug.
Amusing, but I have to disagree with you. And I can only claim that I have said that men and women are the same, in having emotions and the right to feel. We have all feel sad, betrayed and angry. We all have the urge to kill at some point. Do we proceed to do so, because it's so natural?
Men are killing their spouses for cheating on them, even when their women have every right to do so. He had plenty of options! Divorcing her and continuing to spew his semen on everything/anything that moves and being so biologically accurate, suggesting a non-monogamous relationship since he does that anyway, he chose take her life? Why? I thought men didn't have feelings? The wife never said she won't take care of him or feed him or continue to have sex with him, but she deserved to die anyway because human biology said it's not natural for her as a woman? She died because of his fucking 'ego'? Wonder if cavemen had that to.. biologists?
Men are killing their spouses for cheating on them, even when their women have every right to do so. He had plenty of options! Divorcing her and continuing to spew his semen on everything/anything that moves and being so biologically accurate, suggesting a non-monogamous relationship since he does that anyway, he chose take her life? Why? I thought men didn't have feelings? The wife never said she won't take care of him or feed him or continue to have sex with him, but she deserved to die anyway because human biology said it's not natural for her as a woman? She died because of his fucking 'ego'? Wonder if cavemen had that to.. biologists?
Men would simulate his want for a committed relationship, impregnate women then leave them to fend for themselves. Then *sometimes* like to come back to see the kids all grown up, for kicks you know? 🙂 Protecting their offspring from outsiders? Responsibility? Cow dung.
They are expecting to be allowed to lavish in his desires and women cannot because they are 'build' that way? Load. Of. Poop. Women are freaky as heck. Just as men have to supress emotions, women are expected to suppress their sexual desires. Can a biologist tell me that prehistoric women remained faithful to their men? That maybe she caught during ovulation by some sexy ape and horny as hell, and hubby wasn't around? Impossibru! Or did periods I??d love to be enlightened.
This isn't prehistorical times. We can't be walking naked, have sex with minors, or kill in modern society without being thrown in the slammers. All of which were allowed at one time, now isn't. Times have changed. For better or worse? You decide. It's not ALL about survival anymore, there is a word called love now. Someone that everyone wants, is it not?
If it's in your DNA, and natural for you, don't just stop at spreading your seed, man! Embrace your other instints too! Don't stop there either! Be naked, kill someone for their hamburger because he didn't want give it up.
They are expecting to be allowed to lavish in his desires and women cannot because they are 'build' that way? Load. Of. Poop. Women are freaky as heck. Just as men have to supress emotions, women are expected to suppress their sexual desires. Can a biologist tell me that prehistoric women remained faithful to their men? That maybe she caught during ovulation by some sexy ape and horny as hell, and hubby wasn't around? Impossibru! Or did periods I??d love to be enlightened.
This isn't prehistorical times. We can't be walking naked, have sex with minors, or kill in modern society without being thrown in the slammers. All of which were allowed at one time, now isn't. Times have changed. For better or worse? You decide. It's not ALL about survival anymore, there is a word called love now. Someone that everyone wants, is it not?
If it's in your DNA, and natural for you, don't just stop at spreading your seed, man! Embrace your other instints too! Don't stop there either! Be naked, kill someone for their hamburger because he didn't want give it up.
"mother nature has not designed us to have sex for fun", No, she didn't. But do we do it any way? We have anal plugs for Pete's sake! Women look 'rough' without makeup because we are supposed to have it on? Sweating is bad because it looks/smell gross, how dare you remove your toxins that way?! Vaginas aren't supposed to smell like vaginas or fish just because there's fricking sweat glands all around it, it should smell of flowers and fruits. Profits made through bodily insecurities. I can go on forever.
Sometimes it gets me thinking, one man sleeping with half the population, would it not increase the odds of someone dating their half brother or sister and having an inbred together? Then again, nothing surprises me anymore. It would be ok as long as it's true love, right?
Sometimes it gets me thinking, one man sleeping with half the population, would it not increase the odds of someone dating their half brother or sister and having an inbred together? Then again, nothing surprises me anymore. It would be ok as long as it's true love, right?
Posted by NovemberSunPosted by enfant_terrible
@NovemberSun. Btw most of the animals/insects you mention - if not all? - are not even mammals. It kind of puts things in perspective even more as far as I'm concerned - I mean we are mammals and logically, we would probably not have the same biological coding as let's say a bed-bug.
The mammal distinction is a good one. I will have to think on that.
I still think our animal natures are inclined to do so much. However, time has shown that we often exercise restraint and self-reflection on our natures. This awareness changes things dramatically.
It has also been documented that females in nature may not mate with as often as their male counterparts, but they do mate multiple times and go for the highest quality they can get each time. So, that make me ponder if women followed their inherent nature and always selected the "best" or at worst, better than average, how would males evolve? 🙂
click to expand
For the strongest sperm, yes I've heard that also. As shallow as it may sounds, some also consider the level 'attractiveness' (symmetry, I assume) of their mates too when dating. I suppose to ensure a healthy offsrping/reducing the amount of defects.
Posted by NovemberSun
@OneDullExistence
You bring up some interesting counterpoints. I have read several findings that support the feminine sexual libido. Our procreative, sexual drives are pretty intense, too. It has to be pretty powerful for women be pushed down and dominated over for centuries.
This makes me think of something a bit off topic.
I find that when women have sex with TRUE no strings attached, valuing their bodies, being safe and afterwards, immersing themselves right back into some other self absorbed project...it doesn't sit to well with many men- EMOTIONALLY.
Bingo. Women have always
I may not seem like it from what I've written, but I am not a feminist. I have no problems with men or women with multiple partners or casual sex in general. All I am saying is people should be upfront about what it is that they want and that people should be allowed to do as they please so long as it doesn't hurt anyone in the process, physically or emotionally (which can become physical with too much stress).
What's wrong with that?
Posted by OneDullExistence
Amusing, but I have to disagree with you. And I can only claim that I have said that men and women are the same, in having emotions and the right to feel. We have all feel sad, betrayed and angry. We all have the urge to kill at some point. Do we proceed to do so, because it's so natural?
No, we have an urge to fight at one point or another. Killing is not really that natural in the animal kingdom. Animals fight for territory, defending their offspring and/or displaying superiority when needed. None of that needs to involve killing and usually it doesen't. They have a rumble and one of them walks away with his tail between his legs. The only certain kill in the animal kingdom is killing for food.
And btw, of course both men and women have feelings etc. But that doesen't make us biologically equal. We are in other words, not "the same".
And men killing spouses for cheating on them (why do i sense there is a back story to this? ) instead of divorcing them and continuing to spew their semen? It's the most natural reaction of all. The male ego is a very destructive force of nature. I'm not sure where you're going with this. I've already covered the "biological" aspect of this and any other scenario you may have.
But if it means anything, I'm against both cheating and killing women. But I'm just saying, mother nature does not beat around the bush. It is what it is.
Tbh, I actually found this quite amusing. Both points have merits and are factually correct. The simple solution and truth? It's both because its what we choose to make...both men and women. Relationships are what you make them.
I'm sorry I lost you. You said so yourself that the male ego is destructive, did you not? He will not allow her to do it too because of his ego? Dare not tell me that women don't have a ego. Because it feels darn good in front of her friends and family when they know her mate if fucking with every broad on the block. You think it's all about being sad and lonely, fucking no. It's embarrassing. It's degrading. You have your guys friends to show off your loyal girl, but women have to bring damaged goods to meet her mom? No thanks.
From what I've read, gender roles still exist. That is a problem for me. Though I am not a feminist, I believe in doing what feels good and right to me, to to heck with everyone else. You can fuck as many women as you want, but don't come home. Promise? 😉
From what I've read, gender roles still exist. That is a problem for me. Though I am not a feminist, I believe in doing what feels good and right to me, to to heck with everyone else. You can fuck as many women as you want, but don't come home. Promise? 😉
Posted by enfant_terriblePosted by OneDullExistence
Amusing, but I have to disagree with you. And I can only claim that I have said that men and women are the same, in having emotions and the right to feel. We have all feel sad, betrayed and angry. We all have the urge to kill at some point. Do we proceed to do so, because it's so natural?
No, we have an urge to fight at one point or another. Killing is not really that natural in the animal kingdom. Animals fight for territory, defending their offspring and/or displaying superiority when needed. None of that needs to involve killing and usually it doesen't. They have a rumble and one of them walks away with his tail between his legs. The only certain kill in the animal kingdom is killing for food.
And btw, of course both men and women have feelings etc. But that doesen't make us biologically equal. We are in other words, not "the same".
And men killing spouses for cheating on them (why do i sense there is a back story to this? ) instead of divorcing them and continuing to spew their semen? It's the most natural reaction of all. The male ego is a very destructive force of nature. I'm not sure where you're going with this. I've already covered the "biological" aspect of this and any other scenario you may have.
But if it means anything, I'm against both cheating and killing women. But I'm just saying, mother nature does not beat around the bush. It is what it is.click to expand
I never said we were biologically the equal, unless I said men can bear children too? But what I *am* saying is that not all women are monogamous. Sometimes we have urges that one man cannot satisfy (sexually of course).
As for the back story, you can assume it has never happened before in history, that is completely fine by me. But this is the story of a neighbor and true friend of mine who was killed. Needless to say, I have witnessed it firsthand. 🙂 Unfortunately it did not reach CNN as it was all in a small town that no one really paid any attention to. Can't give you any links to an article, sorry. I'd tell you more about the 'back story' but I don't think it will interest you.
And what that about killing not all that natural? Animal planet? Food chains? I think you are talking about animals within the same species, so yes you are right about them competing for grub. But according to nature, the animals are all each others food, so killing *is* in fact, natural. Big animals consume smaller animals, sometimes the opposite if the former was overpowered. Even herbivores kill. Plants.
Killing is killing. Whether you did it because you felt threatened or because it was a mistake (emotionally driven), you took a life. You can kill someone for their kidney because it will save your daughter. Does it matter why if the outcome is the same?
Killing is killing. Whether you did it because you felt threatened or because it was a mistake (emotionally driven), you took a life. You can kill someone for their kidney because it will save your daughter. Does it matter why if the outcome is the same?
Posted by seraph
Sure it's natural.
It's also natural *to make a choice*.
It's also natural to hold yourself to standards.
Because both impulses come from *you*. Everything you decide originates from within you. And nowhere else. Every single thought you have has to contact the Self (you) for value and approval. Every single thought needs to knock on your door, and it's your choice whether you'll let it in. You can just as easily acknowledge its presence, but not identify with it. And so, it passes on, leaving room for something else to arise and contact your Self for approval once again.
There ya go. 🙂
It's all about personal choice. We don't live in the wild any more. We are animals, but we are fully clothed, tower building and sex toy using animals. We are special. 🙂
Posted by beautifulsoul74
Tbh, I actually found this quite amusing. Both points have merits and are factually correct. The simple solution and truth? It's both because its what we choose to make...both men and women. Relationships are what you make them.
Glad you enjoyed as I did.
I think cheating is a a form of deception, but if it isn't, the cheaters sure did a good job make it seem that way. If it isn't why aren't they open about it? Why so shady? First women aren't allowed to cheat, now we don't even deserve honesty? What did you get married for?
If you loved your partner, you should respect them. Why not just tell them about how you feel, and them be free to chose whether to stay or go? If it feels wrong to you, it probably is. If not, continue I won't tell -pinky swear-
Then again, worrying about whether if you're going to be busted is give you an adrenaline rush doesn't it? 😉
Hm..
Posted by OneDullExistence
You said so yourself that the male ego is destructive, did you not? He will not allow her to do it too because of his ego? Dare not tell me that women don't have a ego. [...] From what I've read, gender roles still exist. That is a problem for me. Though I am not a feminist... 😉
I didn't say gender roles don't exist, I said they are a product of our biology. If it was meant to be any other way - and I use the word 'meant' in the loosest sense - that bottle would have popped a looooong time ago. Don't you think?
Furhtermore, women have an ego, but that ego differs from the male ego in that there are different biological expectations for men and women, so naturaly we will not get our egos equally thorned by the same things. And let's not forget testosterone.... it makes ALL the difference and explains more than you may think.
And yes, women are as sexual as men, if not even more so. But there's a difference between having an urge to have sex and having a biological responsibility/need to "spew your semen" into everything in sight.
Some of you seem to be talking about love and relationships and common sense, while I'm talking about the biological core of our existence... which btw is most definitely NOT love or anything that remotely resembles love! I'm sorry to burst your bubble. Biologically it's all about "chores by instinct". Males have their tasks as women have theirs. Is it equally divided? Hell no, if it were I'd start believing in God and intelligent design.
Nature is not fair, I get it. Women have in many aspects been dealt the shortest straw, biologically speaking. What can I say? I cannot defend nor curse something that is not man-made. I cannot even be angry or upset about it. It is what it is.
But rest assured, just because I'm biologically programmed to "spew my semen" every time I get a chance does not make it right for me to cheat simply because I happen to be male. I do however think it is wrong when people refuse to accept certain biological fundaments just because it doesen't suit their agenda for the day.
And speaking of.... @OneDullExistence, since you are coming from a personal place with this issue, it's impossible for me and you to have an objective discussion about it. I mean you're talking about body-image, anal-plugs and vaginal perfumes, among many other things. You're talking about how we have changed since pre-historic times. It's small-time stuff as far as I'm concerned, totally irrelevant to the big picture. You're talking about 21th century culture ,and culture is like the weather. What I'm talking about, the biological codes under which we are subdued - the very reason to why we would even think of let's say cheating - these are constant.
And btw, it's OK to be a feminist. I mean of course you're a feminist. Anyone with a least bit common sense is a feminist. I just think it's silly we have to label common sense with "feminism". I hope that closing statement says a little about where I stand, despite that I "embrace" certain biological fundaments. I'm gonna hit the bed now.
Nature is not fair, I get it. Women have in many aspects been dealt the shortest straw, biologically speaking. What can I say? I cannot defend nor curse something that is not man-made. I cannot even be angry or upset about it. It is what it is.
But rest assured, just because I'm biologically programmed to "spew my semen" every time I get a chance does not make it right for me to cheat simply because I happen to be male. I do however think it is wrong when people refuse to accept certain biological fundaments just because it doesen't suit their agenda for the day.
And speaking of.... @OneDullExistence, since you are coming from a personal place with this issue, it's impossible for me and you to have an objective discussion about it. I mean you're talking about body-image, anal-plugs and vaginal perfumes, among many other things. You're talking about how we have changed since pre-historic times. It's small-time stuff as far as I'm concerned, totally irrelevant to the big picture. You're talking about 21th century culture ,and culture is like the weather. What I'm talking about, the biological codes under which we are subdued - the very reason to why we would even think of let's say cheating - these are constant.
And btw, it's OK to be a feminist. I mean of course you're a feminist. Anyone with a least bit common sense is a feminist. I just think it's silly we have to label common sense with "feminism". I hope that closing statement says a little about where I stand, despite that I "embrace" certain biological fundaments. I'm gonna hit the bed now.
Posted by seraph
For the record, I didn't read all the responses in the thread, I just responded to the question being asked.
I figured as much. There were no references to the other posts in yours. :-)
Posted by OneDullExistence
It's all about personal choice. We don't live in the wild any more. We are animals, but we are fully clothed, tower building and sex toy using animals. We are special. 🙂
We are not a least bit special. What an arrogant statement, typical for the 'thinking animal'. 150,000 years from now it would be like saying neanderthals are special for their stone- paintings and carvings.
Posted by enfant_terriblePosted by OneDullExistence
You said so yourself that the male ego is destructive, did you not? He will not allow her to do it too because of his ego? Dare not tell me that women don't have a ego. [...] From what I've read, gender roles still exist. That is a problem for me. Though I am not a feminist... 😉
I didn't say gender roles don't exist, I said they are a product of our biology. If it was meant to be any other way - and I use the word 'meant' in the loosest sense - that bottle would have popped a looooong time ago. Don't you think?
Furhtermore, women have an ego, but that ego differs from the male ego in that there are different biological expectations for men and women, so naturaly we will not get our egos equally thorned by the same things. And let's not forget testosterone.... it makes ALL the difference and explains more than you may think.
And yes, women are as sexual as men, if not even more so. But there's a difference between having an urge to have sex and having a biological responsibility/need to "spew your semen" into everything in sight.click to expand
Testosterone? I think I may have heard of it. What is it? Google didn't help me.
I just know that whatever it is, there are some women who are born with lots of it in them! Anger juice?
Biological responsibility. Man I sound smart.
Posted by enfant_terriblePosted by OneDullExistence
It's all about personal choice. We don't live in the wild any more. We are animals, but we are fully clothed, tower building and sex toy using animals. We are special. 🙂
We are not a least bit special. What an arrogant statement, typical for the 'thinking animal'. 150,000 years from now it would be like saying neanderthals are special for their stone- paintings and carvings.click to expand
We are still evolving. No beast has accomplished nearly as much as humans thus far, unless you know something everyone doesn't. Sorry for being so arrogant. :/
Can your dog build a tree house? Possibly. But you may not live to see it. One shouldn't try to see so far away.. you can't.
Posted by enfant_terrible
Some of you seem to be talking about love and relationships and common sense, while I'm talking about the biological core of our existence... which btw is most definitely NOT love or anything that remotely resembles love! I'm sorry to burst your bubble. Biologically it's all about "chores by instinct". Males have their tasks as women have theirs. Is it equally divided? Hell no, if it were I'd start believing in God and intelligent design.
Nature is not fair, I get it. Women have in many aspects been dealt the shortest straw, biologically speaking. What can I say? I cannot defend nor curse something that is not man-made. I cannot even be angry or upset about it. It is what it is.
But rest assured, just because I'm biologically programmed to "spew my semen" every time I get a chance does not make it right for me to cheat simply because I happen to be male. I do however think it is wrong when people refuse to accept certain biological fundaments just because it doesen't suit their agenda for the day.
And speaking of.... @OneDullExistence, since you are coming from a personal place with this issue, it's impossible for me and you to have an objective discussion about it. I mean you're talking about body-image, anal-plugs and vaginal perfumes, among many other things. You're talking about how we have changed since pre-historic times. It's small-time stuff as far as I'm concerned, totally irrelevant to the big picture. You're talking about 21th century culture ,and culture is like the weather. What I'm talking about, the biological codes under which we are subdued - the very reason to why we would even think of let's say cheating - these are constant.
And btw, it's OK to be a feminist. I mean of course you're a feminist. Anyone with a least bit common sense is a feminist. I just think it's silly we have to label common sense with "feminism". I hope that closing statement says a little about where I stand, despite that I "embrace" certain biological fundaments. I'm gonna hit the bed now.
The reason I said I was not a feminist was because I don't give a poop about women rights in society. I only care about myself and what I feel I should have the right to know, see and do. I like to make comments on what I find is distastful, but I'm not waiting for any changes. Things can stay as they are, it matters not to me. I admire the passion of t
-rue feminists, so by claming to be one, it's only be an insult to them. 😉
However, you are giving me some real good ideas..
However, you are giving me some real good ideas..
Posted by enfant_terrible
Some of you seem to be talking about love and relationships and common sense, while I'm talking about the biological core of our existence... which btw is most definitely NOT love or anything that remotely resembles love! I'm sorry to burst your bubble. Biologically it's all about "chores by instinct". Males have their tasks as women have theirs. Is it equally divided? Hell no, if it were I'd start believing in God and intelligent design.
Nature is not fair, I get it. Women have in many aspects been dealt the shortest straw, biologically speaking. What can I say? I cannot defend nor curse something that is not man-made. I cannot even be angry or upset about it. It is what it is.
But rest assured, just because I'm biologically programmed to "spew my semen" every time I get a chance does not make it right for me to cheat simply because I happen to be male. I do however think it is wrong when people refuse to accept certain biological fundaments just because it doesen't suit their agenda for the day.
And speaking of.... @OneDullExistence, since you are coming from a personal place with this issue, it's impossible for me and you to have an objective discussion about it. I mean you're talking about body-image, anal-plugs and vaginal perfumes, among many other things. You're talking about how we have changed since pre-historic times. It's small-time stuff as far as I'm concerned, totally irrelevant to the big picture. You're talking about 21th century culture ,and culture is like the weather. What I'm talking about, the biological codes under which we are subdued - the very reason to why we would even think of let's say cheating - these are constant.
And btw, it's OK to be a feminist. I mean of course you're a feminist. Anyone with a least bit common sense is a feminist. I just think it's silly we have to label common sense with "feminism". I hope that closing statement says a little about where I stand, despite that I "embrace" certain biological fundaments. I'm gonna hit the bed now.
Biological responsibility.
Oh wait, you can't be serious with me accusing you (what's going on?) of anything? You trying to confuse me? >:/
Is that a biological responsibility?
Testosterone? I think I may have heard of it. What is it? Google didn't help me.
I just know that whatever it is, there are some women who are born with lots of it in the
Posted by enfant_terrible
Some of you seem to be talking about love and relationships and common sense, while I'm talking about the biological core of our existence... which btw is most definitely NOT love or anything that remotely resembles love! I'm sorry to burst your bubble. Biologically it's all about "chores by instinct". Males have their tasks as women have theirs. Is it equally divided? Hell no, if it were I'd start believing in God and intelligent design.
Nature is not fair, I get it. Women have in many aspects been dealt the shortest straw, biologically speaking. What can I say? I cannot defend nor curse something that is not man-made. I cannot even be angry or upset about it. It is what it is.
But rest assured, just because I'm biologically programmed to "spew my semen" every time I get a chance does not make it right for me to cheat simply because I happen to be male. I do however think it is wrong when people refuse to accept certain biological fundaments just because it doesen't suit their agenda for the day.
And speaking of.... @OneDullExistence, since you are coming from a personal place with this issue, it's impossible for me and you to have an objective discussion about it. I mean you're talking about body-image, anal-plugs and vaginal perfumes, among many other things. You're talking about how we have changed since pre-historic times. It's small-time stuff as far as I'm concerned, totally irrelevant to the big picture. You're talking about 21th century culture ,and culture is like the weather. What I'm talking about, the biological codes under which we are subdued - the very reason to why we would even think of let's say cheating - these are constant.
And btw, it's OK to be a feminist. I mean of course you're a feminist. Anyone with a least bit common sense is a feminist. I just think it's silly we have to label common sense with "feminism". I hope that closing statement says a little about where I stand, despite that I "embrace" certain biological fundaments. I'm gonna hit the bed now.
Biological responsibility.
Cheating isn't responsible. Who's to say your woman and kids won't get mauled by a tiger while you're out fuckin'? Protection my ass. I'd bet it has actually happened before. Unless you are superman and can protect all of your offspring *and* their mother's from various locations, all at once. Biological responsibility. H
-ow effective it really?
In modern time, guy can come give his beloved wife an STD. Yes, we have those now. Some of us don't want to be diseased or transfer it to their babies (but incase you call me out on it again, no this ins't the point). Mose safety precussions don't work all the time. I'd be worried about what can be tranfered to me. Telling your partner to get tests periodically is really hot, but I just can't.
We do not live in the wild any more. In fact, cops, soldiers and even regular women who can protect their own with or without you. I'm not a cop, but I am able to defend myself. In society and in the wild. Since these men fancy abandonment, women have to take care of themselves and *your* offspring. Yes, women. Protecting their children from these so called men, who are our supposed "biological protectors". You really want to pay child support for several different households? And for your 'offspring' to not even accept you as their father? Biological responsibility.
It's needless to say that polygamy is not for everyone. Unlike then, we now have a choice.
My examples are perfectly relevant. It shows that one can be pressured into believing anything as if they were words from God himself. Like you. I'm beginning to question your sources.. so many loop holes. I can dig forever. At this point I don't give a flying burrito about your biology. You seem so obsessed with this (science?) that you can't even think straight. You are a result of believing every you've been told/read without actually experiencing it yourself. True definition of a puppet in society. Come back here when you've visited prehistoric era with solid facts and real personal experience.
In modern time, guy can come give his beloved wife an STD. Yes, we have those now. Some of us don't want to be diseased or transfer it to their babies (but incase you call me out on it again, no this ins't the point). Mose safety precussions don't work all the time. I'd be worried about what can be tranfered to me. Telling your partner to get tests periodically is really hot, but I just can't.
We do not live in the wild any more. In fact, cops, soldiers and even regular women who can protect their own with or without you. I'm not a cop, but I am able to defend myself. In society and in the wild. Since these men fancy abandonment, women have to take care of themselves and *your* offspring. Yes, women. Protecting their children from these so called men, who are our supposed "biological protectors". You really want to pay child support for several different households? And for your 'offspring' to not even accept you as their father? Biological responsibility.
It's needless to say that polygamy is not for everyone. Unlike then, we now have a choice.
My examples are perfectly relevant. It shows that one can be pressured into believing anything as if they were words from God himself. Like you. I'm beginning to question your sources.. so many loop holes. I can dig forever. At this point I don't give a flying burrito about your biology. You seem so obsessed with this (science?) that you can't even think straight. You are a result of believing every you've been told/read without actually experiencing it yourself. True definition of a puppet in society. Come back here when you've visited prehistoric era with solid facts and real personal experience.
I'm not trying to offend you, but there are still a lot of holes in these types of theories. Biology in general is fascinating, but like any science fact, it can be impossible to prove. There just a good chance of being true. It can, however, be disproved. Medicines that were considered safe then, that were purchased and consumed by millions, prove to be cancerous now. Would you continue take then same medicine for your heartburn if it's been proven years later to cause sudden death? Who's to say what they have on the market now is better?
I can see these human biology theories are true to you and I truly respect that. But for me, instead of continuing to read about what recent 'studies' have shown, I dig a bit deeper (sometimes it's in previous studies). You never really know anything about those who participated in them or how well those experiments were conducted. Since I can't reply on online articles and Wikipedia for credible information, I have to do my own research to prove or disprove something. So long as there is reason for me to doubt it, it cannot become my truth. Some are so obsessed with science that they fail to see that an absolute fact simply doesn't exist. No matter what you've heard or read, remember that books and records were written by humans. What does that tell you?
Seriously though, it's been fun. I was quite bored.
Thanks for playing! 🙂
I can see these human biology theories are true to you and I truly respect that. But for me, instead of continuing to read about what recent 'studies' have shown, I dig a bit deeper (sometimes it's in previous studies). You never really know anything about those who participated in them or how well those experiments were conducted. Since I can't reply on online articles and Wikipedia for credible information, I have to do my own research to prove or disprove something. So long as there is reason for me to doubt it, it cannot become my truth. Some are so obsessed with science that they fail to see that an absolute fact simply doesn't exist. No matter what you've heard or read, remember that books and records were written by humans. What does that tell you?
Seriously though, it's been fun. I was quite bored.
Thanks for playing! 🙂
Posted by capricornmoon
The difference between a promiscious male and a promiscious female is-THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. But that does't mean society will not try it's hardest to maintain the status quo, whether it's gender or racial oppresion. Offcourse, there is such a thing as a high body count. I mean people still promote ''free love'' like that iisshh doesn't come with a pack of STDs. Most whores don't like using condoms.
offtopic:
What was up with this 2012 end of the world b.s. I mean wasn't this the most anti climatic event ever, not even a shooting star, or a rock falling through the sky, lol..i'm pissed, if i hear one more acopolypse prediction or media hype in my lifetime, i will personally beat that person over the head with my stillettos.
P.S Merry Christmas everybody!
Didn't they change it to February 2013? lol
Condoms or not, it's still sex. I don't engage in casual sex as of now, but it's nice to know that I can if I wish. 🙂
Posted by capricornmoon
By all means, get your freak on, i will not be a red light to your preferences, lol
Personally, i prefer knowing that the guy likes me alot, is into me, even loves me, for my encounters.
February 2013, huh? *grabs shoe*
hahahah
That's sweet. 🙂
"I'm not trying to offend you, but there are still a lot of holes in these types of theories."
You're not offending me, you're offending everything that science stands for. You're telling me there are plenty of holes in my theories - which btw are not MY theories - please present these holes and while you're at it, present your own take on them. I'm sure you have much more plausable theories than anything science has come up with in the last century.
And about safe and unsafe medications - there is progress made in that field every day - what we know today we didn't know yesterday and that's because it's man-made. So it is under constant change. But when it comes to behaviourism, science hasn't really made any further progress ever since certain undisputable facts have been established. And that's because you cannot dispute the simplicity of nature and biology.
You're not offending me, you're offending everything that science stands for. You're telling me there are plenty of holes in my theories - which btw are not MY theories - please present these holes and while you're at it, present your own take on them. I'm sure you have much more plausable theories than anything science has come up with in the last century.
And about safe and unsafe medications - there is progress made in that field every day - what we know today we didn't know yesterday and that's because it's man-made. So it is under constant change. But when it comes to behaviourism, science hasn't really made any further progress ever since certain undisputable facts have been established. And that's because you cannot dispute the simplicity of nature and biology.
Posted by OneDullExistence
I can see these human biology theories are true to you and I truly respect that. But for me, instead of continuing to read about what recent 'studies' have shown, I dig a bit deeper (sometimes it's in previous studies). You never really know anything about those who participated in them or how well those experiments were conducted.
Ehh no sweetheart, get your head out of your bum. It's not a question of what I believe, we are not discussing religion here. These are undisputed facts regardless of how you and I feel about it!
Nothing I've said here has anything to do with "recent studies" or whatever, it has to do with the simple FACT that we KNOW that all mammals display a similiar behavioral pattern and live in similiar social structures, where females play one part and males another. The same structures can be seen in our civilized society because as I said, "the social gender" is triggered by our biological gender. We do not stand above it just because we are 'the thinking animal'. There will be no progress above nature
So what do you want anyway? Cheat? F*ck around without guilt like a man does? Do it! You dont need my approval or "biological jutification" for that. To me biology is not a question of what you can or cannot do as a woman - I'm not interested in what justifies or excuses certian behaviours, I'm only interested in what explains them, or triggers them. Nature doesn't judge.
And you're talking about what I "believe" in? I don't believe in anything! I either know or I don't. And you have so far not presented anything plausable, you've hardly scraped the surface, you've only talked about what a drag social gender roles are in this modern society, yet you're telling me to dig deeper. I've dug as deep as it can be dug, to the very core of our biological existence. Just look at the way things work in the nature and you don't have to "believe", it's all served on a silver platter! I don't understand why you are so disillusioned about it.
And merry Christmas, btw. 🙂
First off.. happy holidays to you also ^^
I have no problem with gender roles, in fact, I love to cook. But I just don't limit myself when I know there is more to life. It's fun to play housewife from time to time if he likes it. It's not that deep for me. As coming up with new theories, I'm as sophisticated and educated as you so I do not have such divine knowledge of all living breathing things. I'm not a woman of science. I say what I see, not what I've read. And though I may not be able to come up with a theory, that not what science is all about. These 'holes' I speak of, are flaws in this 'scientific fact'. Which was what I've been trying pointing out all along, I think something blocked you.
I have no problem with gender roles, in fact, I love to cook. But I just don't limit myself when I know there is more to life. It's fun to play housewife from time to time if he likes it. It's not that deep for me. As coming up with new theories, I'm as sophisticated and educated as you so I do not have such divine knowledge of all living breathing things. I'm not a woman of science. I say what I see, not what I've read. And though I may not be able to come up with a theory, that not what science is all about. These 'holes' I speak of, are flaws in this 'scientific fact'. Which was what I've been trying pointing out all along, I think something blocked you.
It *was* at some point a recent study. New discoveries were made, and new theories were concluded. BUT, it is still subject to change. No science 'fact' is the end all be all. Non-scientists and scientists alike, understands this.
In human biology, you forget that there are sociocultural, that doesn't have sh*t to do with human instincts or survival, influences. Most of the people today fuck around, not because they feel the 'need' too, but because they think it's cool. A man who is well-experienced with women (no problem with me), is considered an idol in modern day society. Same with women. People think it's 'hot'. Not everyone is born a polygamous, there for polygamy IS NOT A LAW of nature. Men and women, even those who don't even have this 'need' to be polygamous, do so anyway because they think they are 'supposed' to be like this and since it exists in nature and it's something we 'can't help but do'. People can be told they're sick, even when they are perfectly healthy. Their stress and fears become serious complications that will eventually become physical. It's not just biology, it's psychology too.
In human biology, you forget that there are sociocultural, that doesn't have sh*t to do with human instincts or survival, influences. Most of the people today fuck around, not because they feel the 'need' too, but because they think it's cool. A man who is well-experienced with women (no problem with me), is considered an idol in modern day society. Same with women. People think it's 'hot'. Not everyone is born a polygamous, there for polygamy IS NOT A LAW of nature. Men and women, even those who don't even have this 'need' to be polygamous, do so anyway because they think they are 'supposed' to be like this and since it exists in nature and it's something we 'can't help but do'. People can be told they're sick, even when they are perfectly healthy. Their stress and fears become serious complications that will eventually become physical. It's not just biology, it's psychology too.
Oh, these are not your theories? Could've fooled me, biologist. Speaking of arrogance and being so above, what do you really "know"? You don't know squat. No one really does. You have what you have been told or what you've read. That's it. Nothing written by man is absolute. Get your head out of yours, and analyze your words before you try and counter.
Second, what was that you said? You don't believe in what you say? Yet you repeat the same things over and over as if they were set in stone? Theories in general, change. This is enough to prove that that may be deemed to be true now, will change if new discoveries are made. Medicine, human biology, psychology any branch of science. Nature for the most part, stays the same, but a man's take on what's going on, can be totally off. In this case, science seems to be your religion. People can tell you anything, and if you believe it will becomes YOUR truth. Obviously the case.
And also, you can't possibly be serious? Only a large fraction of mammals are polygamous. I don't think a wolf stays loyal to its partner because she'd kick him out? And that is only one of the species who are natural monogamous. Who is to say that the human species is one or the other? If not both? We have more options and reason. This is what sets us apart from other animals. You said yourself that there will be no progress above nature. Man hasn't caught up quite yet. There's much more still to be discovered. Nature doesn't judge, but man does. If you've been paying attention to our history, you know the credibility of these 'judgements'.
Oh, and one more thing, thank you for so kindly allowing me to fuck freely. I never knew I can do that.
Second, what was that you said? You don't believe in what you say? Yet you repeat the same things over and over as if they were set in stone? Theories in general, change. This is enough to prove that that may be deemed to be true now, will change if new discoveries are made. Medicine, human biology, psychology any branch of science. Nature for the most part, stays the same, but a man's take on what's going on, can be totally off. In this case, science seems to be your religion. People can tell you anything, and if you believe it will becomes YOUR truth. Obviously the case.
And also, you can't possibly be serious? Only a large fraction of mammals are polygamous. I don't think a wolf stays loyal to its partner because she'd kick him out? And that is only one of the species who are natural monogamous. Who is to say that the human species is one or the other? If not both? We have more options and reason. This is what sets us apart from other animals. You said yourself that there will be no progress above nature. Man hasn't caught up quite yet. There's much more still to be discovered. Nature doesn't judge, but man does. If you've been paying attention to our history, you know the credibility of these 'judgements'.
Oh, and one more thing, thank you for so kindly allowing me to fuck freely. I never knew I can do that.
Disregard what what I said.
This conversation obviously is going in circles and it's beginning to become dry (..and I'm kinda bored). So let's agree to disagree, yes?
I feel kind of guilty that I enjoyed it. We need to do it again sometime. 🙂
Hope you had a good year~
This conversation obviously is going in circles and it's beginning to become dry (..and I'm kinda bored). So let's agree to disagree, yes?
I feel kind of guilty that I enjoyed it. We need to do it again sometime. 🙂
Hope you had a good year~
I want to end this topic on a good note and re-inform the misinformed, so I??ll post here one last time.
All this polygamy and monogamy business is a mere topic of discussion. I don't disrespect any man or woman's decision to be either. I think I should have been clearer with that in the beginning. It's apparent that we all have different views, but that's a good thing. We can enlighten ourselves with different perspectives. It's fun and thought provoking.
I understand and respect your take on human biology. But I will only say this once. Science is not nature. It is simply man??s interpretation of nature. What they have discovered through trial and error (some times not enough trials), they claim as fact. No one knows for a fact what happened back then. That's the problem. Man is curious and they wants to understand. They make discoveries, some of which aren't even all that reliable. They make up theories on what they —think?? happened in the time before they even existed. The only way to know for sure, is to be in that time period and see for themselves. While that is not impossible, it is right now. I am not staying they are offtrack or even wrong, but it doesn't mean I'm not doubtful.
This is modern day, not the stone age. Females don't cheat because they think is so unfair that only men can. They do it because, like men, they can and want to. It's their choice whether to live together, or not. I can't speak for the other animals, but for us it isn't all about seed spreading anymore. And since men magically have egos now, they expect their lady to stay put even if they aren't going to and have their weak egos stroked. Strong, secure man do not need any of this, but only full support from his woman. Some females allow infidelity in exchange for their freedom to mate with other males (which a big heck no from most men). It's not about fairness, it's being able fulfill ones desires and following one's instincts, without someone pushing meaningless biology down our throats. In the end, we need each other whether we like it or not.
Honestly, as a modern day man, do you really want to be with a woman who is completely indifferent about who or how many women you choose sleep with?
All this polygamy and monogamy business is a mere topic of discussion. I don't disrespect any man or woman's decision to be either. I think I should have been clearer with that in the beginning. It's apparent that we all have different views, but that's a good thing. We can enlighten ourselves with different perspectives. It's fun and thought provoking.
I understand and respect your take on human biology. But I will only say this once. Science is not nature. It is simply man??s interpretation of nature. What they have discovered through trial and error (some times not enough trials), they claim as fact. No one knows for a fact what happened back then. That's the problem. Man is curious and they wants to understand. They make discoveries, some of which aren't even all that reliable. They make up theories on what they —think?? happened in the time before they even existed. The only way to know for sure, is to be in that time period and see for themselves. While that is not impossible, it is right now. I am not staying they are offtrack or even wrong, but it doesn't mean I'm not doubtful.
This is modern day, not the stone age. Females don't cheat because they think is so unfair that only men can. They do it because, like men, they can and want to. It's their choice whether to live together, or not. I can't speak for the other animals, but for us it isn't all about seed spreading anymore. And since men magically have egos now, they expect their lady to stay put even if they aren't going to and have their weak egos stroked. Strong, secure man do not need any of this, but only full support from his woman. Some females allow infidelity in exchange for their freedom to mate with other males (which a big heck no from most men). It's not about fairness, it's being able fulfill ones desires and following one's instincts, without someone pushing meaningless biology down our throats. In the end, we need each other whether we like it or not.
Honestly, as a modern day man, do you really want to be with a woman who is completely indifferent about who or how many women you choose sleep with?
Posted by enfant_terrible
Nature is not fair, I get it.
No, you don't get it.
Because nature is, in fact, quite fair. This rule of polygamy varies upon different species and I only disagreed the fact that you implied that it goes for *all* animals. Some seek multiple females to encourage the population and others have multiple partners for the strongest seed. Some mate for life. Smaller animals get eaten by bigger animals, survival of the fittest? None of which seems unfair to me.
Posted by OneDullExistence
Honestly, as a modern day man, do you really want to be with a woman who is completely indifferent about who or how many women you choose sleep with?
I will admit I've only read the first and last few posts. Being a former 'polygamous', I know a little about this. At first it was to get back at an ex, but then I liked it so I continued. To add insult to injury, I didn't even respect women. Their attitudes and greed disgusted me to no end. But still I knew better than to mess with women whom I knew wanted something serious. By telling them up front that I just wanted sex, I've had near nonexistent issues. It was only until when met my wife that I became monogamous, and by choice. It is very possible that a single woman can completely satisfy a man to where he needs no other. When you truly finally found someone, you won't even see anyone else even if you tried. If he cheats on you, it simply meant that you are not enough.
Have I seen attractive women after I married her? Yes. There is no shortage of beautiful women, but their is a shortage of beautiful AND good women. But that is meaningless. There is nothing there and the sex feels empty. Needless to say that there are men out there who are emotionally sensitive. I'd be torn if I knew she had others or not even care if I had other women on the side. It's not even a matter of my ego, I simply rather not share. Yes, jealousy is a bad thing, only if you go too far. A healthy medium can actually benefit a relationship in my personal experience. Not sure if love existed in prehistory, but it very real now. And there's not much to 'survive' here anymore, except the at workplace. 😛
But very good points though, Leos. -applauds-
I'm finding it really hard to decipher you because you're jumping from one subject to another. You're talking about biology, science, sociology, gender roles etc. - but it's all from a rather subjective standpoint simply because you're paranoid about science. I'll take my chances on "the brain men" any day of the week, because science has no other agenda than to seek truths, no matter how uncomfortable or complicated. If it's a theory then it's more plausable than anything you and I can come up with. What about Pavlov's dogs? The conclusions drawn from that experiment in the field of behaviorism, would a sceptic such a yourself call them "theories" or established facts? I'd just like to know if there is any point in me continuing this discussion with you...
And when you say, "do you really want to be with a woman who is completely indifferent about who or how many women you choose sleep with? " Where did I ever make any claims about where I personally stand on the subject for you to draw any kind of conclusions about me? The way I see it personal opinions are irrelevant here, I was trying to tackle this from an objective standpoint.
^^
Look, why don't you just tell me - what do YOU want me to say and I'll see if I can say it. If not I'll give you a good reason why not.
And when you say, "do you really want to be with a woman who is completely indifferent about who or how many women you choose sleep with? " Where did I ever make any claims about where I personally stand on the subject for you to draw any kind of conclusions about me? The way I see it personal opinions are irrelevant here, I was trying to tackle this from an objective standpoint.
^^
Look, why don't you just tell me - what do YOU want me to say and I'll see if I can say it. If not I'll give you a good reason why not.
Le sigh.. you're not going let me off easy, will you? 😉
It happens when I have to much to say at once. -oops-
Funny how you said I was a skeptic. Scientists are one of the biggest skeptics of all. Whatever science doesn't prove, is wrong or non-exsistant. I can't believe something as the gospel truth if I already see something contridicting it.
But paranoia? Nah, buddy. I am actually quite fascinated by science, of all branches. So no fear here, I'm afraid. But just because I appreciate it doesn't mean I must believe in every word ever written/recorde it as if they were sent to me straight from the heavens above. Would any scientist would bet their life on all any/all of their discoveries being 100% accurate with no possibly of ever being untrue? Just because it has a good chance of being true, doesn't mean it must be. I don't claim anything I've said to be facts or have I ever said any theories were wrong. Only that *theories* can still be disproved, thus, giving me reason not to fully embrace it. Human biology.. how far, may I ask, have you looked into this?
Nature is never wrong or judgmental. But man can be. Me, you and your 'brain men'. Everyone has limits, and like other animals, we are susceptible to misinterpretation and miscalculations. It happens. But I assume that this another sign of paranoia too? What will you do if this part of human biology happen to be misinterpreted? She doesn't usually spell things out for us, that's for sure. Besides, if according to this biology, that polygamy is a fixed trait in males, then that means that natural male monogamists do not exist anywhere in nature. Which was basically what is being said to me now.
It happens when I have to much to say at once. -oops-
Funny how you said I was a skeptic. Scientists are one of the biggest skeptics of all. Whatever science doesn't prove, is wrong or non-exsistant. I can't believe something as the gospel truth if I already see something contridicting it.
But paranoia? Nah, buddy. I am actually quite fascinated by science, of all branches. So no fear here, I'm afraid. But just because I appreciate it doesn't mean I must believe in every word ever written/recorde it as if they were sent to me straight from the heavens above. Would any scientist would bet their life on all any/all of their discoveries being 100% accurate with no possibly of ever being untrue? Just because it has a good chance of being true, doesn't mean it must be. I don't claim anything I've said to be facts or have I ever said any theories were wrong. Only that *theories* can still be disproved, thus, giving me reason not to fully embrace it. Human biology.. how far, may I ask, have you looked into this?
Nature is never wrong or judgmental. But man can be. Me, you and your 'brain men'. Everyone has limits, and like other animals, we are susceptible to misinterpretation and miscalculations. It happens. But I assume that this another sign of paranoia too? What will you do if this part of human biology happen to be misinterpreted? She doesn't usually spell things out for us, that's for sure. Besides, if according to this biology, that polygamy is a fixed trait in males, then that means that natural male monogamists do not exist anywhere in nature. Which was basically what is being said to me now.
I used sociology and psychology to provide examples. While different, they are all a science, made through studies and discoveries. Whether I call the conclusions from behaviorism experiments "established facts" or "theories", is totally irrelevant. Because the topic at hand Both are only the same in terms of being a scientific study. I claimed how these influences can affect the human biology and psychology of the modern day man. That is it.
Alright now, psychology and sociology. Modern day sex is not all instinct as it used to be without all the external influences and peer pressure. Men are expected to be experienced and woman are to suppress sexuality or risk being perceived as loose. The power of society can affect anyone of any age, gender or background. Natural monogamists can *become* polygamists, nothing to do with instincts. Do you see? Even for those who are not naturally polygamous, it can still be *induced*. This is what I am trying to say when it comes to excuses. Not having sex because you feel the need, but to please your peers. This is a problem, not human biology.
Humans don't only rely on —instincts?? anymore. This is why it can be a problem. It causes pointless arguements (and killing) between couples. We now have a level of logic, reason and emotions (well are more conscious about it). If you see fire, of course you'd be curious touch/examine the mesmerizing flame. Knowing what they know now, no one would touch it? If you followed your natural instincts to take over, you'd burn. We are no longer Neanderthals (unless someone in here begs to differ). We now know pain (both types), what causes it and how it can be prevented/reduced/cured. We can't just jump on each other and mate without asking. For humans, it would be —sexual assault??. Times have changed and I feel that people should just learn to adjust rather than using the past to justify actions. Males and females alike.
Alright now, psychology and sociology. Modern day sex is not all instinct as it used to be without all the external influences and peer pressure. Men are expected to be experienced and woman are to suppress sexuality or risk being perceived as loose. The power of society can affect anyone of any age, gender or background. Natural monogamists can *become* polygamists, nothing to do with instincts. Do you see? Even for those who are not naturally polygamous, it can still be *induced*. This is what I am trying to say when it comes to excuses. Not having sex because you feel the need, but to please your peers. This is a problem, not human biology.
Humans don't only rely on —instincts?? anymore. This is why it can be a problem. It causes pointless arguements (and killing) between couples. We now have a level of logic, reason and emotions (well are more conscious about it). If you see fire, of course you'd be curious touch/examine the mesmerizing flame. Knowing what they know now, no one would touch it? If you followed your natural instincts to take over, you'd burn. We are no longer Neanderthals (unless someone in here begs to differ). We now know pain (both types), what causes it and how it can be prevented/reduced/cured. We can't just jump on each other and mate without asking. For humans, it would be —sexual assault??. Times have changed and I feel that people should just learn to adjust rather than using the past to justify actions. Males and females alike.
Human biology is still a study. There are still new findings, any of which can disprove previous 'facts'. None of it are —established?? facts. Just what they concluded from their experiments. No one considers the number of participants in these studies. A hundred men can't speak for the entire population, and that's even if that many people are willing to part take in the experiment.
It is not history where there are physical proof of what exactly took place. Unless they found cave drawings with cavemen getting it on with their neighbors wives too? The only reason I disagreed with you, was not because you said polygamy existed in nature, but rather that it was 'embedded' in 'all animals' and human 'males', even when people of either gender have been known to be both.
While I still question polygamy, I still never claimed it to be untrue or unethical. It's great, in fact! Great, but still not a fixed trait in males or females. I don't even have to disprove it, it's all around us.
It is not history where there are physical proof of what exactly took place. Unless they found cave drawings with cavemen getting it on with their neighbors wives too? The only reason I disagreed with you, was not because you said polygamy existed in nature, but rather that it was 'embedded' in 'all animals' and human 'males', even when people of either gender have been known to be both.
While I still question polygamy, I still never claimed it to be untrue or unethical. It's great, in fact! Great, but still not a fixed trait in males or females. I don't even have to disprove it, it's all around us.
It's not about women having the short stick or not. I know it seems I'm wishing for it to be wrong, so that women have these equal rights blah blah blah, but it isn't so deep. Nope. There are so many different types of people in this world. There's a different flavor to suit everyone's tastes. Even if things don't change, it doesn't have much of an affect on me, or anyone else for that matter. You can agree or disagree, it matters to me not. People will continue to do as they please with or without this study and science, as they always have. "It's just the way it is."
Only that being told something and then seeing something else contradicting, it gets awfully annoying. I love a good debate and seeing different standpoints. Just because I don't agree with the information provided to me doesn't mean I won't respect it for those that do.
Only that being told something and then seeing something else contradicting, it gets awfully annoying. I love a good debate and seeing different standpoints. Just because I don't agree with the information provided to me doesn't mean I won't respect it for those that do.
Oh and the question I asked, was actually supposed to rhetorical. As previous posted, there are men who still believe that they have to be polygamous to truly be a man. It wasn't directed at you. Should've been "men" instead of "you". It's been a long day at the library. Forgive me? Oh come on, it's Christmas. ^^
Mew?
Mew?
Posted by SatoriFierce
people want to hold onto antiquated beliefs about sex and it's a shame
Which was why I started the thread in the first place, I wasn't screaming —NO FAIR!??, screw science, women rule! It's not about women's fairness or set roles in society, that not why I made the post in the first place. Needing sexual freedom, given it's fundamental to a person, being a man or woman has NOTHING to do with it. There are truly females who simply cannot have multiple partners. Still, I don't see this as having the "short end of the stick", when men can be the exact same way. Even down to the jealousy/egotism (op's explanation for this didn't make any sense to me). So what is exactly unfair about this? Nothing. But when people 'play' with each other however, it does bother me to some extent.
Cheating. Giving people the wrong ideas and trying to disguise lust as marital interest? That is deceptive behavior. Do I need to tell people that that is deception and it will inevitably badly backfire? Do I need to say that it can cause serious psychological harm (i.e that 'psycho bitch' someone played the crap out of)? You can't simply tell him or her that you just want a piece but don't want to exchange vows? I'm going to wager that people in general do not like to be deceived. Chastity is STILL a sacred commodity for most people. If a person can't respect that, they truly scum. If you have no problem with what you do, what's there to be afraid of? Sure impress your buddies, but people often forget that they can be honest with their intentions (and themselves) without sacrificing their freedom.
While one can't actually *chose* their nature, they do have a choice either follow up on their primal instincts or go against it. Polygamy isn't not wrong or unethical if you are born with it, but you aren't and is in fact monogamous by nature, you are only doing to impress your friends or to feel macho and/or sexy. Using science to back up deception is acceptable? Is this modern day biological 'responsibility' or an excuse to bail? The past can't save you from the present. Animals have been getting it on long before human biology studies existed. No 'study' about what happened then, should change how one chooses to live now.
In short, anyone who can't differentiate sex and lust from love and commitment shouldn't be pursuing or be involved in monogamous re
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →Related Topics
If leo are the one who get bored fast but how do they last in a long relayionship and admit thedy are never bored w8ith
...is very little about: Men Dating Relating to men in a dating sense How I feel or don't feel about men I basi
Where's my favourite Scorpio milf? :|
Hello, I just joined dxpnet after reading the leo threads here and really love the informative responses. This site rock
I'm reading up trying to find if this is really a compatible relationship or if it's nothing but arguing and an inevitab
Hello guys, Im gonna need you. It appears I may about to be stood up by the aqua who cancelled our original first d
Why do leo men seem to want to just say what they want and run away ( walk away ) quickly as possible? I tried to tal
When leo men get upset it seem like they are so so distant and like give u short answers to everything
i just broke up with my gf we have been fighting alot, have been away from each other for about 3 weeks, and im going th
I'm am madly, truly, and deeply in love with a Leo man. I'm so confused by him. To make a very long story short, I met
I met him in about October we met at a friends Halloween party we begun to talk i noticed he was very over the top and w
The aqua returneth. This is the guy who said how fab I am but was geographically undesirable. Dude with pisces moon
i am a lioness. the kind that is full of love to give, so sweet and peaceful i seem fragile. it's all i can be. but i fe
In the beginning of my friendship with benefits with the Leo I just called things off with today, I said to him I wanted
As I have read a number of threads here and on the other forums, I have begun to think that Leo women might enjoy the du
with an Aquarian. Odd creatures that say 'baby' alot in bed. Much more unexpectedly affectionate than I thought.
I met this Leo guy a little over a month ago when we ran into each other at a wedding we both happened to be attending.
..sign, baby? I need help. How do I ask for someone's sign (and later DOB/COB) whom I've just started chatting with f
I'm chasing that Leo girl for a couple of months. Its not only about sex or flirt. I have feelings for her. I told her s
If this is true according to human biology, than I must be a gay man born into a woman's body. As men can appreciate the divine female form, I can also appreciate theirs (hehehe). There are women who does not need to be emotionally bond to someone to have sex with them, as long as they attracted to person sexually. It's apparent, they don't feel 'dirty' or use' if they continue to do it, right? Not talking prostitutes here, they do some things that others would happily do for free. One only needs to be emotionally stable and differentiate love from sex.
Regardless of gender, people are emotional *period*. Do men not get angry too? Do they not feel sorrow when their loved one depart? Men just don't show it much because they aren't allowed to, society has taught them to suppress it. Having any emotion aside from anger (and being a douche), a man will be perceived as a weak or a 'pansy'. Though it can't be further form the truth, it's what these poor being believe. Even going to the extreme of having no emotions (try to anyway) or sympathy. A man who is irresponsible, violent and greedy are our society's new 'alpha male'. Some say feminists are fighting against the oppression of women, but men oppress themselves too. No one is allowed to be themselves and no one is allowed to be truly normal. Thanks social media..
I have nothing against casual sex or sex with multiple partners, as long as you stay away from marriage and serious relationships. Wake up fellas, being sensible has nothing to do with your gender!
Just venting, sorry. heeheehee 😉