Males and Females

[Vimana]

I bet it's because white power is failing and they're off sucking some Pakistani guy's dick, then proceeding to burn Nazi flags and blast Rap music in honor of the dying of white blood.

 

[damnromulans]

Bahahahaha

ITT Jimmy = all men and everyone who disagrees is wrong

 

[The Ozzman]

I literally just got an IM from my ex about how it's rare to see me on AIM on a Monday morning. I closed the window.

 

[Dak]

Men are prewired for polygamic bonding. Synthesis.

 

[Zephyrus]

But they are also territorial as fuck. Are you suggesting the harem system is most natural to our species?

 

[SentinelSlain]

Maybe lynching men for associating with your women is. Or burning your daughters if they refuse to marry their cousin or uncle. Or burning down a village and everyone in it because you believe them to have cast a spell upon you, shrinking your penis.

 

[Onder]

Maybe lynching men for associating with your women is. Or burning your daughters if they refuse to marry their cousin or uncle. Or burning down a village and everyone in it because you believe them to have cast a spell upon you, shrinking your penis.

Sorry, what again?

 

[Dak]

But they are also territorial as fuck. Are you suggesting the harem system is most natural to our species?

I don't necessarily like "natural" as a descriptive term. But between our desires for bonding, female desires for protection, and male drives to spread seed, the "harem" developed as a culturally acceptable way to satisfy all as much as possible.

Given the statistics on divorce and cheating, it's obvious that even within a culture that supposedly only approves of monogamy, we prove our true desires behind closed doors.

 

[SentinelSlain]

Sorry, what again?

Lynching

Honour Killing

African Penis Shrinking Curses and Spells

 

[Vimana]

Men are prewired for polygamic bonding. Synthesis.

Humans are prewired for multiple functions. Men are prewired to kill just as much as they are prewired to protect, but it's not accurate to say "bottom line, men are wired for killing" or "bottom line, men are wired for protecting." My whole point was you can't take one function and say "that's how human nature really is" when there's another function that's different that's just as natural. Yes, men have predisposition to wanting to reproduce with multiple mates, but they also have a predisposition to pair-bonding.

I don't necessarily like "natural" as a descriptive term. But between our desires for bonding, female desires for protection, and male drives to spread seed, the "harem" developed as a culturally acceptable way to satisfy all as much as possible.

Given the statistics on divorce and cheating, it's obvious that even within a culture that supposedly only approves of monogamy, we prove our true desires behind closed doors.

Obviously women would not have a natural predisposition to polyandry, seeing as they can (usually) only have one offspring at a time. And while men have more predisposition to wanting multiple mates, they are just as capable as females of pair-bonding. It's just that females have pretty much no disposition towards a function that conflicts with pair-bonding.

I think culture comes into play, too. Women are discouraged from being promiscuous while men are encouraged. Also, our culture does not encourage monogamy as much as earlier cultures have. Open relationships and casual sex have become more commonplace and viewed with more positivity. I think it would make sense that even in a culture that values monogamy, having conflicting values will result in a significant number of people who do not have successful monogamous relationships.

And sex does have its ties to emotional connections between couples, so with the way people treat sex, like a meaningless recreation for pleasure like eating candy, it wouldn't surprise me that monogamous relationships aren't taken very seriously or with much commitment.

 

[Dak]

Humans are prewired for multiple functions. Men are prewired to kill just as much as they are prewired to protect, but it's not accurate to say "bottom line, men are wired for killing" or "bottom line, men are wired for protecting." My whole point was you can't take one function and say "that's how human nature really is" when there's another function that's different that's just as natural. Yes, men have predisposition to wanting to reproduce with multiple mates, but they also have a predisposition to pair-bonding.

Technically speaking, one can form multiple "pair bonds". I'm differentiating between actual polygamy and casual sex.

Obviously women would not have a natural predisposition to polyandry, seeing as they can (usually) only have one offspring at a time. And while men have more predisposition to wanting multiple mates, they are just as capable as females of pair-bonding. It's just that females have pretty much no disposition towards a function that conflicts with pair-bonding.

The best statistics we can gather show that infidelity is nearly equal between the sexes. I think those cultural influences you are about to list below are skewing your perspective of female desires. Women may want only one man during reproductive seasons, but that's not a constant state, and even as it is, while it might be one man it doesn't have to be the same man.

I think culture comes into play, too. Women are discouraged from being promiscuous while men are encouraged. Also, our culture does not encourage monogamy as much as earlier cultures have. Open relationships and casual sex have become more commonplace and viewed with more positivity. I think it would make sense that even in a culture that values monogamy, having conflicting values will result in a significant number of people who do not have successful monogamous relationships.

And sex does have its ties to emotional connections between couples, so with the way people treat sex, like a meaningless recreation for pleasure like eating candy, it wouldn't surprise me that monogamous relationships aren't taken very seriously or with much commitment.

Because people think sex = srs reltionship. Sex is not homogeneous. There's quite a different dynamic in specifically trying to reproduce with someone vs a blowjob in the alley.

 

[Vimana]

Technically speaking, one can form multiple "pair bonds". I'm differentiating between actual polygamy and casual sex.

I should have been more specific and said "exclusive pair bonds." I was also differentiating between polygamy and monogamy.

The best statistics we can gather show that infidelity is nearly equal between the sexes. I think those cultural influences you are about to list below are skewing your perspective of female desires. Women may want only one man during reproductive seasons, but that's not a constant state, and even as it is, while it might be one man it doesn't have to be the same man.

I was talking about how desires such as this can be due to the person being subjected to outside influences. For most of our evolution, we were not surrounded by nearly as many sexual stimuli for the purpose of pleasure, and attachment to mates and children was vital for survival. That's why the chemicals involved in love and attachment are produced during sex.

Because people think sex = srs reltionship. Sex is not homogeneous. There's quite a different dynamic in specifically trying to reproduce with someone vs a blowjob in the alley.

Part of what makes sex pleasurable in the first place are chemicals that create nurturing and attachment. While people do not always use sex to bond with others, that doesn't change the fact that we evolved a mechanism in our brains to induce/strengthen bonds and attachment as a result of sex.

Essentially, my point is that sex creates/enforces bonds in humans, and the cultural attitude of sex as meaningless, casual pleasure makes bonds meaningless and casual, and thus harder to maintain, which I think is the cause of the rates of infidelity.

In other words, sex has an initial role/relation to bonding and attachment which the surrounding culture (particularly mass media) detaches from its original role, causing higher rates of infidelity.

Of course, I think this could only really be measured if one were to check oxytocin levels of promiscuous people against the levels of those who are monogamous. My hypothesis is that sexually promiscuous people produce it for strangers faster, but also lose it more quickly than monogamous people. Also, the levels that sexually promiscuous people develop are lower than those in monogamous people, high enough only to gain pleasure in sexual intercourse. In other words, monogamous people have higher, more constant levels of oxytocin than promiscuous people, and thus are more capable of sustaining faithful, stable relationships.

I guess what I'm arguing is that sexual promiscuity is a capability of our sexuality, but not the root of it. The root of it is in mating with a partner that one protects/receives protection from so that the offspring can safely be born and raised.

 

[SentinelSlain]

Femanon sexuality is ultimately a failure of the preliminary pronodules. Once deactivated, the custard is gushing flow.

 

[-CC-]

^

 

[unknown]

Interchangeabilty of thought something something something

 

[Master_Yoda77]

gay farts

 

[Dak]

Well that killed it.

 

[Eligos]

It was entertaining as fuck while it lasted, though. Glad I'm not the only one who thinks the blanket statements Jimmy makes to validate his morally questionable choices are pure douchebaggery.

 

[monoxide_child]

Are you suggesting the harem system is most natural to our species?

yes, a harem system would be natural to our species

but
only in a hyper-violent and patriarchial society where males being killed is an every day occurance and women having an unnatual death is rare, or some other situation where the females vastly out number the males

 

[monoxide_child]

Because people think sex = srs reltionship. Sex is not homogeneous. There's quite a different dynamic in specifically trying to reproduce with someone vs a blowjob in the alley.

this

i get blowjobs all the freaking time

and i rarely do penis-in-vagina sex because i don't want to breed