Page 3 of 12 [ 186 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 12  Next


The NATURAL sexual state for most humans is
Asexuality 6%  6%  [ 2 ]
Monogamy 6%  6%  [ 2 ]
Polygyny (one man, multiple women) 13%  13%  [ 4 ]
Polyandry (one woman, multiple men) 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Promiscuity (multiple men, multiple women) 48%  48%  [ 15 ]
Other (specify) 26%  26%  [ 8 ]
Total votes : 31

fibonaccispiral777
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 1 Sep 2013
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 441

02 Feb 2014, 2:31 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
fibonaccispiral777 wrote:

I have no idea. It is a mystery to me. Probabaly they wish to project their own lifestyles onto other people so they are more confident in how they behave.

I thought the same but it's not necessary. I am not judging the promiscuous lifestyle. If others do, who cares? Screw them (and they just might hehe.)


I have no problem with people being promiscuous, people should be able to do as they wish sexually providing it does not harm other people. I am not here to say that people should be mongomous. My point is that I do not believe anything is truly 'natural' and that humans are too complex to pin down in terms of what is natural and what isn't. People should have the freedom to do as they wish. Haha, good one.



fibonaccispiral777
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 1 Sep 2013
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 441

02 Feb 2014, 2:35 pm

Kurgan wrote:
fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
There's nothing natural about monogamy.


What evidence have you got to prove that statement? Plus, how do we define what is natural and what is not? Surely everything is natural since the human brain has its foundation in the natural world and thus anything it decides to do is somehow natural. Natural is a very odd word.


I cannot prove a negative, but monogamy didn't exist up until the rise of Ancient Egypt, and didn't become widespread until the Roman Empire gained foothold. Before that, you basically had f*ck friends and one-night stands.


Plus of course you can prove a negative, I can prove it is NOT raining by looking outside and seeing that it is not.


Your statement that it rains is falsifiable. Simply claiming that monogamy is natural is unfalsifiable, and thus, you can't be proven wrong directly. The fact that people cheat on each other, the fact that many cultures are still polyamorous, and the fact that people in the neolithic era were widely believed to have practiced polygamy, is at least evidence that it's the natural state.

I can, however, make an unfalsifiable claim that it only rains when you're not looking outside, and that the rain drops do not make a sound--in which case you can't prove me wrong.

Plastic is not natural, but hydrocarbons are. Even though plastic does not occur in the nature, it makes our lives easier--monogamous relationships with a lot of unwritten rules, mind games, and so on, does not make out lives easier.

For some people, believe it or not, no sex is natural. Why can't people just accept there are shades of grey?

Exactly, nothing is truly natural and we each have our own individualistic needs. As you say, many people are asexual. To be fair, I do not know why this debate even exists since we have the freedom to do both, be mongomous and be promiscuous unless we are wanting to set up some sort of sexual totalitarian dictatorship in which people are forced to be promiscious.

Yes it's like some people get so defensive for some reason and everyone must be their way. I don't know why that is?


I have no idea. It is a mystery to me. Probabaly they wish to project their own lifestyles onto other people so they are more confident in how they behave.


I know I shouldn't dignify this one with an answer, but the western world forces it's Post-Roman family values onto other cultures all the time. People who believe that polygamy is natural do not have to justify their views to you; at least not until you can prove that monogamy is a natural state.


I am not stating that mongomy is a natural state. I have never every said that. You are twisting my words. I am all for people being polygamous. My point is that I do not believe there is such a thing as a 'natural' sexuality. Also, the western world does not force people to obey to the idea of monogamy. Many people are mongamous because they choose to be, not because they have been forced.



fibonaccispiral777
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 1 Sep 2013
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 441

02 Feb 2014, 2:43 pm

Kurgan wrote:
fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
-Well, if you are saying that you cannot prove a negative, the burden of proof is somehow on you since as I said by saying that, it is in itself a negative and thus is unprovable. Also, I do not agree with Ocaam's razor since what is most likely is subjective in certain circumstances.


Technically, no. It's up to you to prove than you can prove a negative when the claim is unfalsifiable if you wish to debate about it.

Quote:
-Explain the difference? Surelty evidence constitutes proof.


http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-t ... proof.html

Quote:
-Haha, no they are not. The fact that something at times proves difficult for a variety fo reasons does not somehow mean it is unnatural. That is a false equivalency.


The fact that it's significantly less convenient than the alternative is at least an indication that it's unnatural.

Quote:
- So what if chimpanzees do not kill their offspring or have monogomous relationships? We are genetically different from chimpanzees and thus are not expected to behave in the same way as them. Also, a few bad apples, haha, many pre-historic cultures, and many many after, such as in Ancient Egypt, practiced tribal sacrifice. Does that mean such an act of aggression was somehow natural?


They practiced human sacrifice because authorities encouraged it, and the very same thing is what made monogamy the designated standard. Speaking from a genetical point of views, chimpanzees have more in common with us than they do with other apes.


Just out of interest Kurgan, do you think people therefore SHOULDN'T be in relationships?



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

02 Feb 2014, 3:19 pm

I picked "other."

I prefer to view humans as "serially monogamous." We hook-up for awhile until the oxytocin runs out, than we move on to someone else who stimulates more oxytocin.

In any case, any human mating behavior is "natural" by virtue of humans being part of nature.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


fibonaccispiral777
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 1 Sep 2013
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 441

02 Feb 2014, 3:21 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
I picked "other."

I prefer to view humans as "serially monogamous." We hook-up for awhile until the oxytocin runs out, than we move on to someone else who stimulates more oxytocin.

In any case, any human mating behavior is "natural" by virtue of humans being part of nature.


Exactly, pair-bonding is a more suitable term. Saying this however, there are many people who find each other when they are in their teenage years and stay together forever. It is not commonly the case but it happens. Exactly, whatever we choose to do is natural since we are part of nature.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

02 Feb 2014, 3:46 pm

fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
I picked "other."

I prefer to view humans as "serially monogamous." We hook-up for awhile until the oxytocin runs out, than we move on to someone else who stimulates more oxytocin.

In any case, any human mating behavior is "natural" by virtue of humans being part of nature.


Exactly, pair-bonding is a more suitable term. Saying this however, there are many people who find each other when they are in their teenage years and stay together forever. It is not commonly the case but it happens. Exactly, whatever we choose to do is natural since we are part of nature.


Totally agree.

Also, I hypothesize that some humans simple have a greater neurological ability to "pair-bond" than others. I can see where a variety of mating behaviors (monogamy, polygamy, ect.) would benefit the human race at different times; therefore, I think it's reasonable to suspect that humans are flexible across the board.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


Shau
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Age: 166
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,270

02 Feb 2014, 5:57 pm

Kenjuudo wrote:
Shau wrote:
I'm waiting for the part where being promiscuous apparently means a woman can't be raped. The argument is far too common for my tastes.
Ehm, where did THAT come from? I don't see how it is even possible to link promiscuity with rape... :scratch:


From another thread, covering a similar topic.

Kurgan wrote:
I cannot prove a negative, but monogamy didn't exist up until the rise of Ancient Egypt, and didn't become widespread until the Roman Empire gained foothold. Before that, you basically had f*ck friends and one-night stands.


You can demonstrate a lack of evidence for monogamy. Until you do, the statement you made is null. As it were, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that monogamy has been a part of human evolutionary history, such as having reduced testicular size compared to bonobos.

What a lot of people in this thread seem to be forgetting is that it is folly to presume that humanity has relied exclusively on one sexual strategy.

PS: "Natural" is a meaningless term. Everything we humans do is "natural". Even plastic is "natural". "Nature" is just another way of saying "the universe".

XFilesGeek wrote:
I picked "other."

I prefer to view humans as "serially monogamous." We hook-up for awhile until the oxytocin runs out, than we move on to someone else who stimulates more oxytocin.


Ah, an interesting addition to "monogamy", "harem", and "promiscuous"! Make that 4 mating strategies exhibited by humans.

Quote:
In any case, any human mating behavior is "natural" by virtue of humans being part of nature.


YES! Finally someone else who gets it! I get sick of people tossing the word "natural" around like it means anything.



loudzoo
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 46
Location: North Florida

02 Feb 2014, 6:31 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
In any case, any human mating behavior is "natural" by virtue of humans being part of nature.




Hehe...careful saying stuff like that, the organic food industry might put a price on your head :wink:



Shau
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Age: 166
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,270

02 Feb 2014, 7:29 pm

loudzoo wrote:
Hehe...careful saying stuff like that, the organic food industry might put a price on your head :wink:


The dichotomy here to be looking at isn't "natural" vs. "unnatural", because I can show you a number of very "natural" substances that will right f**k your day up.

What we should be looking at is "harmful" vs. "not harmful".



Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

02 Feb 2014, 7:53 pm

Kenjuudo wrote:
Shau wrote:
I'm waiting for the part where being promiscuous apparently means a woman can't be raped. The argument is far too common for my tastes.
Ehm, where did THAT come from? I don't see how it is even possible to link promiscuity with rape... :scratch:


Some people use the "logic" that if a woman wanted sex with multiple partners, she must want it with ALL men.


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

02 Feb 2014, 8:19 pm

Okay, here is a hunter-gatherer tribe

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SW0jzXTS6A[/youtube]

They describe family arrangements at about 35:00

Quote:
Even their sexual relationships go beyond social barriers. They practise simultaneous polygamy for both men and women. And in this hut lives a woman who has 4 husbands, and a man with 2 wives. The initiation in sex in the first marriage is always with an older man or woman. For example, a 12 year old girl may marry a 40 year old man. Or a 13 year old boy may marry a 60 year old woman.


Not exactly bonobo-style orgies, but a far cry from Western-style monogamy.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

02 Feb 2014, 11:32 pm

I am not even sure what people mean by "naturally." Every minute you are alive you are doing what comes naturally whatever that may be. I am all for not feeling guilty about comfort zones. We all have a right to ours and yes, this can be "natural."
Just because one group does it one way doesn't mean it is any more natural than any other way.



Kenjuudo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,553
Location: Norway

03 Feb 2014, 10:37 am

Who_Am_I wrote:
Kenjuudo wrote:
Shau wrote:
I'm waiting for the part where being promiscuous apparently means a woman can't be raped. The argument is far too common for my tastes.
Ehm, where did THAT come from? I don't see how it is even possible to link promiscuity with rape... :scratch:


Some people use the "logic" that if a woman wanted sex with multiple partners, she must want it with ALL men.
Some people eat babies, and some people s**t each other in the face. Nobody denies that there are crazy people running about. What's your point?

I like ice-cream. Some random rapist likes ice-cream. Ergo I am a rapist.


_________________
Something is happening...


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

03 Feb 2014, 1:11 pm

All right. Since a request was issued early on, and people are waiting...

In the Trobriand Islands

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/woman-ma ... 65806.html

Quote:
...the annual yam festival is not just about well, yams. Sure, the yam is 'king' during this time as competition reigns between villages for the title of 'tokwaibagula' ('good gardener') but it is also a time that sex rules. Women are permitted by their paramount chief to capture men and have their way with them, as in assault them sexually. A native islander will say that she can 'rep' (rape) the men!

The women lie in wait in the bushes (it is rainforest heaven there) and ambush a man who might be walking to work or awaiting transportation. The only rule I read about is that the man cannot be a member of the woman's tribe/village; it's always a man from another tribe/village.

Some males who had been assaulted twice, said that they got over the initial shock and actually enjoyed it (what a surprise!). The only adverse part of this ritual is that if a male couldn't 'perform', the women could urinate on him…and bite off his eyebrows…and eyelashes. This act would surely provoke ridicule from fellow villagers.

The festival time is considered a very dangerous period for a man to be out alone so men would usually go out in groups – just in case. Hey, the defense for 'doing it' in the bushes — making love was supposed to bring fertility to the crops. By the way, it has been said that the Trobrianders were of the opinion that there was no correlation between sex and conception (too long to explain!)....

...Pre-adolescent children are permitted to engage in erotic games with each other and adopt sexual behaviours and attitudes. Within a few years, they begin to have sex and change partners often, acts that are not only allowed but encouraged!

It is not unusual for a teenaged girl to sleep with many boys as this was a good practice to determine who would make a good husband. In order to ensure that a boy married you, you just had to ensure that both of you were together when the sun rose the following morning! Girls were known to use underhand tactics to ensure the guy stayed put until the prescribed hour. Who can blame them?

According to an article by one Isabella Tree, in the Trobriand Islands, there is no traditional marriage ceremony. Once the female is at her guy's house after sunrise, they would wait together in the morning for the bride's mother to bring them cooked yams. Once they eat together, the marriage is officially recognised. The now married couple would eat together for about a year and then go back to eating separately..

A Trobriand couple wishing to marry, could also display their interest by not only sleeping together but spending time together and staying with each other for several weeks. The girl's parents approve of the couple when a girl accepts a gift from a boy. After that, the girl moves to the boy's house, eats her meals there and accompanies her husband all day. Word subsequently spreads that the boy and girl are married.

If a woman is unhappy with her husband after a year, she may divorce him. One funny detail I noted was that if a man had been the one to leave a woman, he could try to reconcile with the woman by offering her family yams(!) and other gifts!....

....Sigh… One world, many cultures, traditions… When I first heard of this place, I found great pleasure in relating the few details I had garnered to male friends and acquaintances. Every man's eyes lit up as they asked excitedly, "Where is this place? I moving there, boy!" I wonder if they'd change their minds what with the eyebrow/eyelash aspect?

Last year the festival was held during late July and early August. I haven't seen any dates for this year but ladies, if you overhear your guy on the phone with a travel agent…


These aren't exactly hunter-gatherer folk: they raise yams, and probably pigs, since they are in the South Pacific, and apparently have chiefs....

But, anyway, their sexuality (including female-on-male rape) seems not to have been overly influenced by Western mores, except for the guys now looking to book flights there during the Yam Festival.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,550
Location: Aux Arcs

03 Feb 2014, 1:18 pm

What if the woman charging out of the bushes looked like Janet Reno?Would they want to book a flight then?They are imagining sex kittens popping out of the bushes and it could be a horny old granny.Then the men would complain about it.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

03 Feb 2014, 1:20 pm

fibonaccispiral777 wrote:
-And what makes you think that promiscuity is more conveniant considering the spread of STI's, emotional issues and also preganancy? Also just because something is more conveniant does not mean it is more natural. That is a flase equivalency. It is more convenient for me to not learn how to play guitar than learn how to play since learning guitar takes time and effort, however that would mean, according to your view, that playing guitar is unnatural. Convenience is a very difficult word to define.


What precisely is it that makes serial monogamy more reponsible and convenient? Being polyamorous comes without all the obligations of "common" (serial) monogamy.

Quote:
-If I am not wrong, human beings are more closely related to bonobo monkeys than chimpanzees. Also, just because we genetically similar does not mean we are thefore expected to behave like them.


Even better, in that case; bonobos are extremely sexual beings and about as monogamous as your average rabbit.

Quote:
Many alterations in behaviour may occur because of slight genetic differences. Also, you seem to be almost implying that the authorites doing something is less natural than the people wanting to do it, when they are both natural, they are just by-products of a different social strata. Also, just because they were encouraged does not mean they were obliged to do it if they were entirely against it. Also, many tribes commit genital mutilation? I suppose because they are older societies means it is natural for us to commit genital mutilation as well.


And many tribal societies do not commit genital mutilation. Genital mutilation is a result of socially conditioning people into thinking sex is taboo--and probably a result of Roman prudishness as well.

I don't judge people for being monogamous. After all, this is what we're socially conditioned into thinking is "right". With that being said, a lot of people would be better of by giving polygamy a chance.