tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post113651559147687113..comments2024-03-25T09:14:03.458-04:00Comments on Too Many Thoughts: My very first readers' pollTymhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15168089811114758802noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137472422584264442006-01-16T23:33:00.000-05:002006-01-16T23:33:00.000-05:00There are stereotypes you trust or don't trust, bu...There are stereotypes you trust or don't trust, but that doesn't mean that you're taking an extreme position. <BR/><BR/>Cross cultural comparisons do not represent the whole spectrum of possible human behaviour. Male dominance takes place in more developed societies, but some anthropologists have discovered female dominated societies (among them the Amazonians), most of which are primitive and pre- literate. Apparently the universality of male dominance has to do with the invention of writing.<BR/><BR/>In fact most of the idols in the pre-literacy era were female, something that could not have happened in a male dominated society. I'm not sure what the sexual mores of those days were like, but it's probably different. In some of those matriachal tribes they found the guys had to dress up and put on make up.<BR/><BR/>We are actually living in a special, male dominated part of human history, and part of the perceived horniness of man is their dominant position. Maybe it could still be the same when you discount that but who knows? And in the world we live today male dominance is being eroded away so it will be interesting to see what happens. <BR/><BR/>Studying humans through observation is subscribing to behaviourism, an extremely useful, but ultimately limited methodology. Limited by its unwillingness to ascribe motives to that behaviour.<BR/><BR/>Parang example - of course there are other factors involved in the decision, but then it's up to you to come up with another example to illustrate a point which is after all yours and not mine.<BR/><BR/>What is it about a girl that would make her dodgy? You might want to look at <A HREF="http://xiaxue.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">this </A>. (first time I posted link din work).7-8https://www.blogger.com/profile/13772775395041477772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137472312666518192006-01-16T23:31:00.000-05:002006-01-16T23:31:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.7-8https://www.blogger.com/profile/13772775395041477772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137237862240812392006-01-14T06:24:00.000-05:002006-01-14T06:24:00.000-05:00"How Girls Waste Time" is not titled "How ALL Girl..."How Girls Waste Time" is not titled "How ALL Girls Waste Time; a list of activities, ALL of which must be partaked in for one to qualify as a girl".<BR/><BR/>Only the most irrational would argue that stereotypes ALWAYS apply. And only the most irrational would argue that you either operate SOLELY according to stereotypes or NEVER at all.<BR/><BR/>How do you know which stereotypes are true? Through experience and observation. And a big reason why their stereotypes are different is that what they are stereotyping may not be the same as what we're stereotyping. Look at Ephesians and women, for example.<BR/><BR/>Prevailing paradigms are chosen according to the evidence. Old ones are discarded when a new paradigm fits the evidence better (and probably as the old fogeys die). That does not mean that we don't have any paradigms (or assumptions) at all; we always need epistemological frameworks to operate in, and to interface with the world. The problem is to choose the best one(s), and to bear in mind their limitations.<BR/><BR/>Fertility idols are female. Why? Because fertility was important to our ancestors. What does that have to do with the dominant sex?!<BR/><BR/>If there is cross-cultural evidence that guys are hornier, we can't blithely ascribe the difference to "culture", now, can we? And where might culture come from too?<BR/><BR/>Fear of death is one thing, but what about other situations? Everyone unconsciously uses existing knowledge in order to deal with new situations.<BR/><BR/>Those factors are important for males too, yes, but they prioritise them differently, especially for short-term liaisons.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>It is all well and fine to make assumptions, as long as they are reasonable ones, and as long as one bears in mind the limitations of said assumptions.<BR/><BR/>However, assuming that one can make no assumptions is an assumption in and of itself, and can be even more misleading and damaging than the assumptions one fears making in the first place.<BR/><BR/>In any case, no one manages to live life without making assumptions. Not without going insane, at any rate.Agagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137172059621711012006-01-13T12:07:00.000-05:002006-01-13T12:07:00.000-05:007-8:hmm.. Am curious: in your opinion, what is it ...7-8:<BR/><BR/>hmm.. Am curious: in your opinion, what is it about a girl that would make her character 'dodgy'?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137089515925174172006-01-12T13:11:00.000-05:002006-01-12T13:11:00.000-05:00Allow me to pay you a backhanded compliment in say...Allow me to pay you a backhanded compliment in saying that I seldom witness such a fertile profusion of fallacious arguments. <BR/><BR/>It could well be that the stereotypes that persist and endure are true. But how do you know which stereotypes these are? You study history and you'd be amazed - their stereotypes are very different from yours. <BR/><BR/>But you're a pro science guy, are you not? Not content to just take stereotypes at face value. At least I hope not. But unfortunately a lot of science is like that: frame the question according to stereotype and accepted "wisdom", and then tack on the data. Kuhn's name for it is "paradigm", after he read some "scientific" papers written 1000 years back and started wondering "how the hell did they believe all this shit?"<BR/><BR/>Males weren't the most dominant sex. Most of the idols in the day and age before writing have been female. Rather than believe guys are hornier than girls, I believe that it's the dominant sex which is more upfront about things that are up their fronts. Maybe they really are hornier, but not by much.<BR/><BR/>The parang thing, it's the weighted average of the fear of death. At 10% risk of death, on aggregate you won't die, but you'd still run away.<BR/><BR/>I choose to believe what Tym has written. Obviously, guys being guys, you'd add "a hot ass and nice boobs" to the list, but the rest are important. So if some Jessica Alba lookalike threw herself at me, but I knew she had a dodgy character I'd still think twice.7-8https://www.blogger.com/profile/13772775395041477772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137084410287152672006-01-12T11:46:00.000-05:002006-01-12T11:46:00.000-05:00Forgot to add that I believe that guys want simila...Forgot to add that I believe that guys want similar things --- at least, those guys that I'd consider worth my while.<BR/><BR/>Agagooga > Thank you for perpetuating stereotypes. It seems I'm not a girl, then, since I've never done anything remotely resembling #44 on your list.Tymhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15168089811114758802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137084227663042242006-01-12T11:43:00.000-05:002006-01-12T11:43:00.000-05:00What do women want?Here's one Hollywood version, f...What do women want?<BR/><BR/>Here's one Hollywood version, from one of my favourite movies <I>Beautiful Girls</I>, and which for once isn't too far from the truth:<BR/><BR/>TOMMY: He makes you happy?<BR/>ANDERA: Yeah. I look for that in a man. The ones who make me miserable never last.<BR/><BR/>For a less glib response, I'll offer up the following: <BR/><BR/>Love. <BR/>Reassurance --- not of the pandering kind, just what comes of being around people whom you know love and support you, and aren't tearing you down behind your back.<BR/>Emotional security. <BR/>Kindness. <BR/>Consideration. <BR/>Support. <BR/>Honesty --- the kind that tells you when you're screwing up bigtime, but also reminds you when you need to keep doing what you're doing, even though it doesn't seem to be getting anywhere at the time.<BR/>The ability to laugh at yourself, as well as to laugh, in general.<BR/>The moments of "Eureka!"<BR/>The moments when you say or think exactly the same thing, and then both your instincts is to say, "Let's not do that ever again" --- even though you know you will, and you don't mind it, really, deep down.<BR/>Friendship.<BR/>Hope.<BR/>Love.Tymhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15168089811114758802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137083882106828382006-01-12T11:38:00.000-05:002006-01-12T11:38:00.000-05:00"The absence of a father while growing up has been..."The absence of a father while growing up has been reliably linked with the pursuit of a short-term mating strategy. Among the Mayan of Belize and the Ache of Paraguay, for example... Other studies of both women and men have found that those growing in father-absent homes are more likely to reach puberty sooner, to engage in sexual intercourse earlier, and to pursue a short-term mating strategy (e.g., Ellis, McFadyen-Ketchum, Dodge, Pettis, & Bates, 1999; Surbey, 1998). Intriguingly, one study found that stepfather presence, even more than biological father absence, may be the critical factor promoting early sexual maturation in girls - a likely precursor to the pursuit of a short-term mating strategy (Ellis & Garber, 2000)... Finally, poor attachment to one's parents was linked to a higher likelihood of reading pornography among women, and predicted sexual promiscuity for both sexes (Walsh, 1995, 1999)." (pp. 183-184)<BR/><BR/><BR/>Okay. Good to know if I ever go bar-trawling.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://gssq.entryplug.org/writings/girl.htm" REL="nofollow">How Girls Waste Time</A><BR/><BR/>44. Drawing up elaborate lists detailing their "ideal" man, including in them qualities such as "sensitive", "thoughtful", "caring" and "good listener" (ie They want a "nice guy") and exchanging them with other similarly emotionally disturbed girls, then falling head over heels in love with the first jerk, alpha male or lying bastard (ie The antithesis) who comes along<BR/><BR/>44. a) Describing their ideal man to their Intellectual Whore, not realising they're describing him to a tee, then going for jerks anyway.<BR/><BR/>44. b) Swearing to hate all guys forevermore after the latest jerk has cheated on them, then going for another jerk on their rebound anyway.<BR/><BR/>44. c) Confusing the hell out of all the men interested in them - what women want, what women say they want and what women think they want aren't always the same.Agagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137080113121868072006-01-12T10:35:00.000-05:002006-01-12T10:35:00.000-05:00I've a few theories about what women look for in m...I've a few theories about what women look for in men.<BR/><BR/>One is related to the Elektra complex. The way I'd put it is thus:-<BR/>If the father has largely made the girl feel good about herself or has given her a happy childhood, she'll be looking for a man with traits like his. <BR/>If the father has largely made the girl feel bad about herself or has given her a lousy childhood, she'll be looking for a man very much unlike him.<BR/>There are women with abusive/neglectful fathers who repeatedly end up with abusive/neglectful men, and it may be because these women are comfortable with the roles they used to play as girls. They're so depleted of the ability to experience or expect something better that they merely look for that which they're accustomed to. <BR/><BR/>What about the guys who are consistently popular with many different 'types' of women? <BR/>My observation is that these guys either:--<BR/>(a) exude self-assuredness, possessing widely acknowledged prowess in popular measures of 'manhood' (eg, wealth, giftedness or accomplishments), and/or<BR/>(b) have a 'way with women'. These men are very at ease amongst women, and are able to speak 'womanese' ie. thinking on the same wavelength & talking the same language; they're able to do & say the things the women want. I've noticed this trait in guys who grow up surrounded by women & have been close to one or a few of them. <BR/><BR/>Any other theories?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137071238982522662006-01-12T08:07:00.000-05:002006-01-12T08:07:00.000-05:00Nardac: Make love, not war!7-8: Stereotypes persis...Nardac: Make love, not war!<BR/><BR/>7-8: Stereotypes persist and endure because they are often true. Where does culture come from? Surely innate human attributes and attitudes contribute much to the formation of culture and cultural attitudes.<BR/><BR/>The rules of the game have changed, yet humans are still wired the same way. Thus not everyone plays according to the same rules - we still have the brains of hunter-gatherers.<BR/><BR/>The social sciences differ from the hard sciences in that more than one paradigm can prevail at a time (quantum mechanics and relativity being an exception in the latter). So just because one theory is true does not mean another isn't also true, or that both are rubbish.<BR/><BR/>If out of 1,000,000,000,000,000 people running at you with a parang, only 1 wanted to kill you, would you run away? Weighted probabilities and expected return, really, not fear of death. There's a higher chance of drowning in a swimming pool than being shot (?), so do we abjure swimming?<BR/><BR/>Guys go for beautiful girls with good bodies. As for what women want, to quote the master:<BR/><BR/>"The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is 'What does a woman want?'" - Sigmund FreudAgagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137051135745977552006-01-12T02:32:00.000-05:002006-01-12T02:32:00.000-05:00If we're taking about 'strategies' for 'landing' a...If we're taking about 'strategies' for 'landing' a mate here, I guess a good strategy for girls is to observe those girls whom many guys fall for, and learn what is it about them. And the reverse is true for guys.<BR/><BR/>Anyone care to bring up some examples? For the guys: what are the attractions of those girls whom many guys 'fall' for, & vice versa for the girls?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137047612500064562006-01-12T01:33:00.000-05:002006-01-12T01:33:00.000-05:00When judging whether something is macho shit, you ...When judging whether something is macho shit, you don't look at external appearances. Somebody like Stephen Hawking, he looks frail, but his attitude is macho shit.<BR/><BR/>The commonly accepted wisdom is that women hit their peak (in horniness) ard 30 or so. There have been some recent challenges to this, and now some people believe that women hit their peak at 18, but only at 30 do they gain the maturity to be fully comfortable with expressing their sexuality, since it's always easier for a guy to express his sexuality than the girls.<BR/><BR/>I don't like ideals in science also and that's why I don't agree with the standard alpha male vs faithful woman theories because they tend to play too much to gender stereotypes.<BR/><BR/>Even if you have theories from evolutionary psychology about whether women don't f*** around the rules of the game have changed and in large part this was what the 60s were about: the pill / condom / etc etc. Where women used to be inhibited about sex because of the pregnancy risk, that has been removed and women have almost as much liberty as before.<BR/><BR/>Men and women are obviously not the same but I still think that their differences are exaggerated. Like how YO was talking to LMD about "beware of guys looking for casual sex" when LMD has extensively documented her encounters, it doesn't make sense.<BR/><BR/>It's not that you can't learn anything from science, but everything with a pinch of salt. Science can tell you how to handle your data, but it can't tell you how to frame your questions. I can trust Newtonian mechanics 100% but when it comes to people then you got to start asking questions. Once there are competing explanations - for example, how much of this difference in attitudes is due to biological programming, and to what extent women are saying what they say just because this is a male dominated society - you have to start being skeptical.<BR/><BR/>Taking your parang example, if out of 1000 people running at you with parangs, 100 of them want to kill you, you'd still run away, so the issue here is not the aggregate, but rather the risk of death.7-8https://www.blogger.com/profile/13772775395041477772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1137001124067061092006-01-11T12:38:00.000-05:002006-01-11T12:38:00.000-05:00What's most obvious to me is that sex grabs people...What's most obvious to me is that sex grabs people's attention like nothing else (another evolutionary trait perhaps?). Just look at the number of comments on this post vs the others.<BR/><BR/>Nardac: when you write your best-selling book you know what it's got to be about.. shimmying & shammying on the palace gates..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136994094752098832006-01-11T10:41:00.000-05:002006-01-11T10:41:00.000-05:00I believe Tym's asking a question about ideals, no...I believe Tym's asking a question about ideals, not reality. But, it also seems as if Tym should probably restate the question in an unambiguous way.<BR/><BR/>I'm not really interested in debating "reality" with people because I'm not about to go out and do something I don't believe in, just because everybody else is.<BR/><BR/>Ideally, we should all get raging naked and do the shimmy shammy on the palace gates.NARDAChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08178357844367164683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136917998895972882006-01-10T13:33:00.000-05:002006-01-10T13:33:00.000-05:001. yes2. yes3. yes1. yes<BR/>2. yes<BR/>3. yesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136883725333302072006-01-10T04:02:00.000-05:002006-01-10T04:02:00.000-05:00YO: One very plausible reason why love is not disc...<I>YO: One very plausible reason why love is not discussed much in social sciences is that there's too much macho shit going on there, owing to the social structure of academia itself.</I><BR/><BR/>Macho shit? You must be mad. Try looking at the Arts and Social Sciences department of any faculty. Literature and Sociology will be a good place to start.Agagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136883426659294442006-01-10T03:57:00.000-05:002006-01-10T03:57:00.000-05:007-8: For some data on human nature, you can see: h...7-8: For some data on human nature, you can see: http://gssq.blogspot.com/2005/09/therere-lots-of-interesting-bits-in-my.html<BR/><BR/>Perhaps you were talking about ideals. I was not talking about ideals or making judgments - I was talking about reality since some people seem to dispute it. What is and what ought to be are not the same. I believe that consenting and informed adults can do anything they jolly well please to each other.<BR/><BR/>The left wing and the social scientists have been trying to uncover holes in this sort of thing for a long time, but so far all they've managed to do is find exceptions rather than disprove the rule.<BR/><BR/><I>How evolutionarily profitable is it for a guy to pump his sperm into any hole he can find, without being personally there to make sure that the child grows up well?</I> - If you have 200 illegitimate children, pretty profitable actually, especially if you have one wife/some wives you stay faithful too.<BR/><BR/><I>Often, part of the whole story is worse than a lie.</I> - Aiyoh. Then let's all tell lies then. Women are as horny as men. Hurrah!<BR/><BR/>Science may be reductionist, but little elements build on each other, and the scientific method never proclaims infallibility. Is it not better to try to understand something then declare: "Ah, it is too complicated. We cannot understand it!" and claim we cannot conclude anything? Just because we can never have absolute certainty does not mean that we cannot know anything. Do you know if you're a brain in a vat? If not, why don't you throw yourself off the 13th storey?<BR/><BR/>Claiming that everything is biased so we cannot conclude anything is similar disingenuous - that's why we have debate and review and discussion, to uncover flaws and weaknesses, rather than dumping everything away and pretending we're doomed.<BR/><BR/>If hypotheses work in the aggregate, we can generally agree with them, while remembering that exceptions exist. In daily life we work the exact same way. If 999/1000 men rushing at your with parangs want to kill you, it makes sense to act as if all 1000 are.Agagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136882881949539032006-01-10T03:48:00.000-05:002006-01-10T03:48:00.000-05:00Science can deal with love actually. Perhaps not a...Science can deal with love actually. Perhaps not as well as you'd like, but it does not claim it doesn't exist.<BR/><BR/>Love is seen in Evolutionary Psychology as a way of ensuring pair bonding - not so much for happy children as for bringing them up with both parents around in the first place.<BR/><BR/>Ideals? Huh? You mean archetypes? Stereotypes persist and endure because they are often true. Anyhow it's unfair to diss or even deny scientific findings or what we observe because we fear that they will be taken as ideals. This is falling prey to the naturalistic fallacy. Life may be solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short, but this does not mean that life *should* be so.<BR/><BR/>It is a curious confusion to move from the proposition that some women can be as horny or hornier than men to the proposition that men are not hornier than women as a whole. Btw, women reach their sexual peak in their late 20s/early 30s so this partially accounts for your observation. Read: http://gssq.blogspot.com/2005/09/therere-lots-of-interesting-bits-in-my.htmlAgagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136865560627179752006-01-09T22:59:00.000-05:002006-01-09T22:59:00.000-05:007-8: Your posts make a good read."gate-keepers"......7-8: Your posts make a good read.<BR/><BR/>"gate-keepers"... muahahahah... Perhaps many women do not mind maintaining the appearance that they're less hardup for sex than men so as to maintain some kind of social leverage. <BR/><BR/>Many accounts of marriage-counselors (& those that I've come across are mostly from North America) reveal that when it comes to sexual incompatibility betw the spouses, it's much more the case that the husband wants sex more frequently than the wife (not INVARIABLY the case, of course, I qualify, and these are for those conjugations in which incompatibilites exist). I'm not sure if this information has been proven to be statistically significant. <BR/><BR/>The 'reductionist' nature of science, ie, the repeated testing of hypotheses, really does come in handy for say--when you are traveling in an aircraft--when you'd hope that all the science happens as it should .. :)<BR/><BR/>The best approach is perhaps a balanced one betw idealism & realism: ie, focus & work on the similarities (betw the sexes), but be aware of the differences & work around them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136821456582934322006-01-09T10:44:00.000-05:002006-01-09T10:44:00.000-05:00YO: One very plausible reason why love is not disc...YO: One very plausible reason why love is not discussed much in social sciences is that there's too much macho shit going on there, owing to the social structure of academia itself. <BR/><BR/>"I'm right, you're wrong". Or "let's talk about something 'respectable'." Or "Publish or perish". Or "I'm refereeing your paper, and I'm wincing at how soppy it is". Or "For f---'s sake stop talking about stuff you cannot put a real number to, stuff that can be shot down. Talk about stuff that's harder to shoot down."<BR/><BR/>To turn Godel's theorem on its head: the truth is out there, whether you can prove it or not.7-8https://www.blogger.com/profile/13772775395041477772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136820837548167682006-01-09T10:33:00.000-05:002006-01-09T10:33:00.000-05:00Agagooga: You say that men like to fuck a lot more...Agagooga: You say that men like to fuck a lot more than women. But how much is a lot? And why don't you, since you like to quantify so much, quantify that? <BR/><BR/>I don't deny that there is human nature, why should I, since I am after all commenting about it? Isn't it more like we're positing different opinions about what human nature is?<BR/><BR/>In the aggregate, the difference might be there, but my point is precisely that we are not talking about aggregates here. We are positing the behaviour of 1 man, and 1 woman. You base your judgement purely on aggregates, it's misleading. <BR/><BR/>The data is there, you apply rigour to all the data. But how do you interpret the data? You see a man go for a woman, and you posit reasons, do your statistic analysis and all that shit. But the meaningful part here is the interpretation. <BR/><BR/>Are guys "choosing" sex over love because that's what they said, in response to what you asked them? Or is it simply an image that it's more profitable for them to upkeep? Are women simply more coy about saying how much they like it? Their role is to be gatekeepers, because after all they are the gate.<BR/><BR/>Is it that women love to love, and men like to fuck? Or is it that women love men who like to fuck, and men like women who love to love, which is why men always say they like to fuck, and women always say they love to love?<BR/><BR/>How evolutionarily profitable is it for a guy to pump his sperm into any hole he can find, without being personally there to make sure that the child grows up well? <BR/><BR/>How would merely counting numbers account for all this complexity? Often, part of the whole story is worse than a lie. <BR/><BR/>This is what I don't really like about science. Too reductionist. Hypothesis, test hypothesis. When it comes to something that you can't measure (and I know this because my work involves statistics) or can't handle, you gloss it over and discount it. The bias is inherent, and systematised. Maybe even institutionalised. YO mentioned why it's so difficult to talk about love. You can't measure love. Much harder than strapping a barometer to somebody's dick. Why you'd even love a person's flaws, it makes little evolutionary sense. <BR/><BR/>Science can only check the veracity of simple, uncomplicated stories. eg, Do girls like men with large body parts? You ask a question like: take a girl from this family. She has been raised this way. She likes drinking - shall we say, a lot? She did this. Or so she says. He did that, or so she says. What's going to happen next? <BR/><BR/>How is a scientist going to answer this, on the basis of accepted scientific wisdom? Science wasn't designed to answer questions like this.<BR/><BR/>Science is primarily the work of people with a narrow spectrum of personalities. As much as I like reading it to increase my knowledge I will never accept that it is the whole story. Biases are inherent in all reporting, that is the lesson of history, and lessons of history apply to everything that is written down on pieces of paper.<BR/><BR/>I find it very easy to <I>accept</I> theories. But I find it very difficult to <I>apply</I> them.<BR/><BR/>My take on the poll? Try to concentrate on the similarities between men and women, rather than their differences. It makes life better for all.7-8https://www.blogger.com/profile/13772775395041477772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136788262215357862006-01-09T01:31:00.000-05:002006-01-09T01:31:00.000-05:00not going into discussions of the finer issues the...not going into discussions of the finer issues the questions raised.<BR/><BR/>on a factual note, my answers go:<BR/><BR/>1) can.<BR/><BR/>2) can.<BR/><BR/>3) can. but most won't because of social structure/fabric/blah blah blah...points all discussed above.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136765046450857142006-01-08T19:04:00.000-05:002006-01-08T19:04:00.000-05:00Nardac: muahaha... your quick wit never fails to a...Nardac: muahaha... your quick wit never fails to astonish me.. (not being snarky here)<BR/><BR/>I wonder why some of the most 'repressed' modern societies actually have their ancient equivalent of the kama sutra... The chinese have the Jin1 Ping2 Mei2 (literally "The Plum in the Golden Vase", also translated as "The Golden Lotus") & the Middle-East, the Arabian Nights.<BR/>Any historians/sociologist care to expound on what happened to these societies to be so repressed in modern times? <BR/><BR/>Nardac & ejl:--<BR/>If I didn't make myself clear earlier:- I was NOT saying more (as in China & India) is better. I was merely showing that Nardac's comment below only applies to the comparatively small enclave of humanity that she encounters (ie, in North America & France) & is therefore a poor representation of the predominant mores of humanity in GENERAL. "" But, I don't believe for a second this idea about the aggregate of men needing more sex than women. For heaven's sakes! Such an antiquated notion that's disproved by almost all of my girlfriends. "" Nardac & her friends must be burning the torch of liberty for the human race..<BR/><BR/>Put another way, if an extraterrestrial were to come & take a RANDOM sample of humans, unlike what Hollywood would lead us to believe, most of the specimens aren't going to be from the more forward-looking cultures.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136747609757188392006-01-08T14:13:00.000-05:002006-01-08T14:13:00.000-05:00YO: i don't think population rates have anything t...YO: i don't think population rates have anything to do with whether or not 'virtuous' females abstain from sex until marriage.<BR/><BR/>as i mentioned before, society and religion have a lot to do with how one views sex between consenting persons within or without marriage. <BR/><BR/>the female's roles in indian and chinese societies are generally subjugated and subservient. the 'virtue' of these women are imposed upon them by the patriarchal environment, not because it occurs naturally. perhaps it is precisely because it would not occur naturally that such a patriarchal and male-dominated environment must be imposed.<BR/><BR/>and of course, we are all generalising about our social and sexual stereotypes, but i don't think the morals of asians are much different from those in europe or america. especially when it comes to the issue of 'fucking around'.<BR/><BR/>the biggest difference would come from the perception of the rights and wrongs of premarital sex, and also how much it affects a female's reputation. <BR/><BR/>many europeans and americans that i have come to know are as concerned over loyalty, faithfulness and promiscuity as any other singaporean person, but they are not so quick to make judgment as singaporeans are. <BR/><BR/>in singapore, it is common to hear completely off the cuff statements about persons one barely knows relating to their morality and their sexual promiscuity, and then completely dismissing them as having no value at all except maybe a one night stand. and this applies equally to males and females.<BR/><BR/>perhaps if we got off our moral high horses, and come to face the reality that the frequency and presence of sex in one's life doesn't make a difference to one's character, more singaporeans would be better sexually adjusted.ejlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12676448350957103253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5658132.post-1136746725449156842006-01-08T13:58:00.000-05:002006-01-08T13:58:00.000-05:00And the Kama Sutra line is meant to be positive! T...And the Kama Sutra line is meant to be positive! Though I've never read the thing... I've perused some illustrated copies before... right... that's all I have left in the old empty barrel.NARDAChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08178357844367164683noreply@blogger.com