View Full Version : Who Suppresses Female Sexuality?
Optimist
03-28-2007, 11:24 AM
Does that mean that some guys are not supportive of their friends? There are a lot of dudes who come on talk shows who aren't supportive of their friends at all. They can't wait to snag their friend's mate.
Djoser
03-28-2007, 11:35 AM
Does that mean that some guys are not supportive of their friends? There are a lot of dudes who come on talk shows who aren't supportive of their friends at all. They can't wait to snag their friend's mate.
Sure, it's bad form, but somewhere out there there will be a bunch of guys who will high-five the asshole.
I'm surprised you weren't aware of this tendency, Nicolina--though it would be a big mistake to view this as a criticism--far from it!
I swear, it's like a football game for so many guys. Score, team, score!
Nicolina
03-28-2007, 11:43 AM
Sure, it's bad form, but somewhere out there there will be a bunch of guys who will high-five the asshole.
I'm surprised you weren't aware of this tendency, Nicolina--though it would be a big mistake to view this as a criticism--far from it!
I swear, it's like a football game for so many guys. Score, team, score!
Yeah, I mean, I guess I've witnessed it, but I just hadn't thought about it in the context of this particular question. In general, guys are depicted as competing for mates, especially when you're talking about this stuff from an evolutionary perspective. This definitely added a new twist to that discussion for me.
(If you haven't guessed, I'm working on a paper for Evolutionary Psychology/Human Sociobiology, and using you guys as guinea pigs to bounce some of these ideas off of...I originally wanted to do something along the lines of "A Natural History of Prostitution," but it seems to be morphing into questions about the suppression of female sexuality and the nature of female sex drive....)
Thanks for your input, everyone! :)
Djoser
03-28-2007, 12:01 PM
(If you haven't guessed, I'm working on a paper for Evolutionary Psychology/Human Sociobiology, and using you guys as guinea pigs to bounce some of these ideas off of...I originally wanted to do something along the lines of "A Natural History of Prostitution," but it seems to be morphing into questions about the suppression of female sexuality and the nature of female sex drive....)
Thanks for your input, everyone! :)
I am envious--I love writing papers! I had a lot of fun helping my last SO with her college research and papers, she was stripping to put herself through college, and her school wasn't cheap. The poor thing was exhausted half the time. To her credit, she often chose not to make as much use of my assistance as others might have.
I am very happy to participate in some small way--if only the dancers in my club were as inspired about the subject as so many are here! I like both of your topics--maybe you could still write something about the original subject for another course?
Casual Observer
03-28-2007, 07:44 PM
Forgive me for doing so--but I do think men are more competitive than women, overall.
More broadly, I agree, as men's endeavors in athletics, business, politics and military organizations demonstrates throughout time--men just have a higher tolerance for risk and competition, but specifically with regard to relationships and sexuality, women are more competitive--almost as if men presume that they're not really in competition with other men (again, that pervasive team effort), even if those same men have greater ability to score more often with better women. Men generally know when a woman is beyond their grasp and adjust their sights accordingly, but you don't hear men begrudging other men their social and sexual successes in the same way that is so utterly common among women.
Though I will say I am disgusted that someone as revolting as Ron Jeremy can have as many hot chicks as he has...it's just not right. It's like he's defiling them, and not in a good way.
What was the original question again?
Silverback
03-30-2007, 06:42 PM
(If you haven't guessed, I'm working on a paper for Evolutionary Psychology/Human Sociobiology, and using you guys as guinea pigs to bounce some of these ideas off of...I originally wanted to do something along the lines of "A Natural History of Prostitution," but it seems to be morphing into questions about the suppression of female sexuality and the nature of female sex drive....)
:)
I was wondering why you've been asking these questions, Nic. After all, you above most here already know the answer.
Expensive eggs.
Biology reinforces sociology/sociology reinforces biology.
I wish I could find an old article on infidelity among red-winged blackbirds that I remember. It does a wonderful job on explaining the whole cycle.
Good luck on the paper. :)
Can I see when you're done?
Embyr
03-30-2007, 07:22 PM
I was wondering why you've been asking these questions, Nic. After all, you above most here already know the answer.
Expensive eggs.
Biology reinforces sociology/sociology reinforces biology.
I wish I could find an old article on infidelity among red-winged blackbirds that I remember. It does a wonderful job on explaining the whole cycle.
Good luck on the paper. :)
Can I see when you're done?
I bet your citation could be found (as well as most of the other animal kingdom examples) in the most excellent book titled "The Myth of Monogamy." wow that book opened my eyes... to date one of the most interesting voluntary (i.e. not for school) non-fiction reads I have laid my greedy little hands on.
Nicolina
03-30-2007, 07:25 PM
I wish I could find an old article on infidelity among red-winged blackbirds that I remember. It does a wonderful job on explaining the whole cycle.
Ooh! I think I know exactly which study you're referring to--it's a classic in behavioral ecology. The authors found that the quality of habitat & available resources in each male's territory would determine whether he was monogamous or polygynous that season--is that the one you're thinking of?
Good luck on the paper. :)
Can I see when you're done?
Thanks! Sure you can--if I ever get my butt off SW and actually write the damn thing! ;D
(Though, I have to admit that it's proving problematic to come up with a solid thesis, and I'm thinking about switching my topic altogether--to the question of whether or not ADHD is actually a personality type that has some adaptive value, especially when it occurs at some particular frequency within a given population (i.e. relate it to frequency-dependent selection somehow; I haven't yet read any papers that do that.) That would be way more straightforward, and more science-y, too--behavior genetics and all that.)
But someday I would like to do a book with the subtitle "A Natural History of Prostitution." I googled that phrase and, surprisingly, I thought, absolutely nothing came up.
Silverback
03-30-2007, 09:40 PM
Ooh! I think I know exactly which study you're referring to--it's a classic in behavioral ecology. The authors found that the quality of habitat & available resources in each male's territory would determine whether he was monogamous or polygynous that season--is that the one you're thinking of?
I remember it more as explaining the genetic benefit of infidelity to either gender. Males gain by spreading sperm far and wide and by having females and, to some degree, other males raise their young (while they lift as few fingers as possible). Females gain by increasing the genetic diversity in their young while having a stable (and misinformed) male around to insure that their young achieve maturity. Could still be the same article, though.
This one is not bad, though:
http://www.trinity.edu/rnadeau/FYS/Barash%20on%20monogamy.htm
And, my favorite quote:
"Once a dominant silverback male has achieved control over a harem of females, he is pretty much guaranteed to be the only male who copulates with them. " :)
We'll not mention the part about the small testicles. OK!! >:(
And, here's another one:
http://archive.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/01/23/monogamy/index.html