Freethought & Rationalism Archive

luvluv · 06-08-2002, 08:02 AM

All right I will read the book but I'll also find a book for you to read, and we'll do a little exchange. How about that?

bonduca · 06-08-2002, 08:10 AM

No. I have no interest in reading the perpetuation of stereotypes presented to me by overeager twenty-five year olds whose scientific knowledge apparently consists of hyperbole absorbed through pop culture. I have already progressed through this stage of my development and have no personal attachment to you to render me patient and understanding.

But let me know how you like the book.

luvluv · 06-08-2002, 08:13 AM

But again, I don't know what bearing the book would have on my position. It doesn't suprise me at all that some women are promiscuous, or event that many animals have evolved strategies to that effect (not suprising, since many animals do not rear their young and much of our sexual imperatives stem from the fact that our young are born comparatively helpless), but that does not have anything to do with the position that a) human males are more interested in promiscuity than human females, b) that the negative consequences of promiscuity fall heavier on the female than the male and that therefore c) human males will always be the primary beneficiaries of a promiscuous society.

I would probably reccomend that you read the Great Disruption by Francis Fukiyama, if you haven't already. Is that a deal?

[ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]

luvluv · 06-08-2002, 08:17 AM

Well, hey, it's no skin off my chest. I'd have probably read the book anyway, if I had come across it. But for the record Fukiyama is not me. He's a little older than 25 and pretty well respected in his field.

bonduca · 06-08-2002, 08:19 AM

Please reread my post, I have expressed no interest in making any "deals. "

[ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: bonduca ]

luvluv · 06-08-2002, 08:23 AM

Fine, don't worry about it. I'll read the book.

Bree · 06-08-2002, 08:33 AM

Still waiting - you seem to like to analyse things, so why not me? Or LadyShea? Since you seem to know so much about the psyche and sex...

seebs · 06-08-2002, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
I am only trying to get you folks to conceed one tiny point: that at least SOME of the sexual differences between men and women are grounded in biology. I'm sure of it is socialized, but some of it is not.

That doesn't seem too controvesial... but we would have the question, then, of which differences those would be.

Bree · 06-08-2002, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by seebs:


That doesn't seem too controvesial... but we would have the question, then, of which differences those would be.

Well, boys have this little thing call a "wee" and girls have this little thing called a "vageena" - start from there

.

luvluv · 06-08-2002, 08:59 AM

Bree:

1) I am not an analyst.

2) I would need to know a lot more about your sexual habits even if I were an analyst.

If you are willing to divulge enough information for a totally untrained layman can make an uneducated guess about you, be my guest. Until then, I'll withhold my diagnosis.

bonduca:

So you are saying that there is no difference between how men and women experience and view sexuality? You are not saying that it is culturally determined, you are saying that the difference does not exist?

[ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]

06-08-2002, 08:13 AM	#123
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	But again, I don't know what bearing the book would have on my position. It doesn't suprise me at all that some women are promiscuous, or event that many animals have evolved strategies to that effect (not suprising, since many animals do not rear their young and much of our sexual imperatives stem from the fact that our young are born comparatively helpless), but that does not have anything to do with the position that a) human males are more interested in promiscuity than human females, b) that the negative consequences of promiscuity fall heavier on the female than the male and that therefore c) human males will always be the primary beneficiaries of a promiscuous society. I would probably reccomend that you read the Great Disruption by Francis Fukiyama, if you haven't already. Is that a deal? [ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]</p>

06-08-2002, 08:19 AM	#125
bonduca Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: . Posts: 1,653	Please reread my post, I have expressed no interest in making any "deals. " [ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: bonduca ]</p>

06-08-2002, 08:59 AM	#130
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	Bree: 1) I am not an analyst. 2) I would need to know a lot more about your sexual habits even if I were an analyst. If you are willing to divulge enough information for a totally untrained layman can make an uneducated guess about you, be my guest. Until then, I'll withhold my diagnosis. bonduca: So you are saying that there is no difference between how men and women experience and view sexuality? You are not saying that it is culturally determined, you are saying that the difference does not exist? [ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-08-2002, 08:02 AM	#121
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	All right I will read the book but I'll also find a book for you to read, and we'll do a little exchange. How about that?

06-08-2002, 08:10 AM	#122
bonduca Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: . Posts: 1,653	No. I have no interest in reading the perpetuation of stereotypes presented to me by overeager twenty-five year olds whose scientific knowledge apparently consists of hyperbole absorbed through pop culture. I have already progressed through this stage of my development and have no personal attachment to you to render me patient and understanding. But let me know how you like the book.

06-08-2002, 08:17 AM	#124
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	Well, hey, it's no skin off my chest. I'd have probably read the book anyway, if I had come across it. But for the record Fukiyama is not me. He's a little older than 25 and pretty well respected in his field.

06-08-2002, 08:23 AM	#126
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	Fine, don't worry about it. I'll read the book.

06-08-2002, 08:33 AM	#127
Bree Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Twin Cities, USA Posts: 3,197	Still waiting - you seem to like to analyse things, so why not me? Or LadyShea? Since you seem to know so much about the psyche and sex...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.