J. D. Stembal Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 Corrupt according to who? There is certainly no consensus on this. I for one have not experienced corruption in my sexual interactions. I'm not sure what the above sentence actually means. So, before you move on in your argument, you have to address the validity of your premiss. It's not my premise. It's the premise of the book in question, Sex at Dawn. Did you read it? I would point out the current divorce rate and the amount of legal and state extortion aimed at men in particular as examples of corruption. - At least 40% of marriages are terminated by the wife. - 95% of child support is paid by the husband. - Every 22 minutes a man commits suicide. - Divorced men are 2.5-3 times more likely to commit suicide that the average male. - Married men die younger than single men. I also didn't claim consensus. Do you want to retract your accusation of falsehood, or provide some information of your own?
jpahmad Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 It's not my premise. It's the premise of the book in question, Sex at Dawn. Did you read it? Right, it's still a false premise I would point out the current divorce rate and the amount of legal and state extortion aimed at men in particular as examples of corruption. What does this have to do with modern sexual interactions? - At least 40% of marriages are terminated by the wife. - 95% of child support is paid by the husband. - Every 22 minutes a man commits suicide. - Divorced men are 2.5-3 times more likely to commit suicide that the average male. Again, what does this have to do with modern sexual interactions? - Married men die younger than single men. Please provide the resource for this data. I've always heard it was the other way around I also didn't claim consensus. Do you want to retract your accusation of falsehood, or provide some information of your own? I didn't say you claimed consensus. I said, "there is certainly no consensus"
shirgall Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 http://jech.bmj.com/content/47/3/200.short Magnitude and causes of mortality differences between married and unmarried men. ... Overall mortality was greater for all groups of unmarried men ... 1
TheRobin Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 It's not my premise. It's the premise of the book in question, Sex at Dawn. Did you read it? You might've missed my comment then. Apparently most of what that book claims to be true is just false. They're criticized for botching the evidence (leaving out all the parts that don't fit their theory) and making gross mistakes when it comes to the very basics of evolutionary reasoning. (here again to link to the review of the book that forwards these critiques http://www.epjournal.net/articles/the-myth-of-promiscuity/getpdf.php?file=EP10611616.pdf)
Lians Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 We have a Truth About Monogamy presentation in the pipeline, and it naturally addresses human sexuality as well. 3
jpahmad Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 We have a Truth About Monogamy presentation in the pipeline, and it naturally addresses human sexuality as well. Great Lians!
J. D. Stembal Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/living-single/201103/maybe-time-it-will-stick-get-married-and-you-ll-live-longer-is-myth "Men who never marry far outlive men who marry then divorce." The world's longest study on longevity, the Terman Lifecycle Study, concluded that single men and men who stay married live far longer than divorced men. Since at least 40% of marriages are ended at the woman's request, and the suicide rate is higher for divorced men (see forced child support and alimony), all these factors paint a grim picture for modern sexual relations, particularly from the male perspective. Has anyone read Sex at Dawn? I'll ask for the third time. 1
MMX2010 Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 What I am saying is that individuals have the impulse created (by the way they are genetically and epigenetically shaped) to be either polygamous or monogamous. An individual can produce stress hormones for a wide variety of reasons (poverty being only one of them) and society is only one of the factors in creating stress. I don't know how you meant this. If "either polygamous or monogamous" means "in a life-long way, never wavering between the two", then I don't agree. But if you meant "either polygamous or monogamous in the moment", then I agree.
jpahmad Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/living-single/201103/maybe-time-it-will-stick-get-married-and-you-ll-live-longer-is-myth "Men who never marry far outlive men who marry then divorce." Oh, this makes sense. You made it seem that married men (not divorced) have shorter life spans. Of course divorced men have shorter lives. They go through so much more stress. The key is not to get divorced.
J. D. Stembal Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 Oh, this makes sense. You made it seem that married men (not divorced) have shorter life spans. Of course divorced men have shorter lives. They go through so much more stress. The key is not to get divorced. I'm sorry for the confusion. I thought it was clear that I was indicating that the odds of life success for married men are not very good, all other factors being equal. It's kind of like me coming in here and saying that the majority of Chinese people are shorter than average, and then you introduce me to Beijing basketball team, saying the key to height is to play basketball. 1
jpahmad Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 I thought it was clear that I was indicating that the odds of life success for married men are not very good, all other factors being equal. Your study doesn't say this. 1 1
J. D. Stembal Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 Your study doesn't say this. I haven't done any study. Have you? Until someone comes to the thread that has also read Sex at Dawn, I don't have any further comments.
kalmia Posted December 21, 2014 Posted December 21, 2014 I read Sex at Dawn. Much of it is an explanation and defense of female promiscuity. It also claims that the agricultural revolution subjugated women's natural promiscuity. I don't remember any place where it connected the agricultural revolution to female sexual selection theory. The book does not deny female selection theory. It gives plenty of examples to show that even in a very female promiscuous society, there is still selection. It said that the selection was based on penis size and ability to give women orgasms. Without females selecting for agriculturally skilled males, the agricultural revolution would not have happened. Females not only wanted males to enclose land and hold property for future use but also wanted men to hold them for future use. All male behaviors are the result of female selection.
jpahmad Posted December 21, 2014 Posted December 21, 2014 @ endtheuserpation, the study has different results for men then it does for women. The study you cite though is, I don't know what it is, it seems to be a critique of earlier studies, and nothing is completely refuted. Anyway, that is your proof that modern sexual interactions are "corrupt"? Again, I don't see what this study has to do with monogamy. I really don't. Marriage and monogamy are not synonyms.
Recommended Posts