Reply With Quote
So WTF is the argument here?
Hence the female dominant mating systems.
So WTF is the argument here?
That women have boobs because men like it.
Oh, and that's how they get men to marry them.
So the argument is if marriage/monoagamus(sp) is natural for humans? My answer: to an extent yes.
If it makes you guys feel any better...I've been single for 10 years now and have had sex with 3 different women in the past 2 months(hey turning 40 is a ), and I'm working on a fourth in a class I am taking, a fitness freak, she looks like all those athletic dancer/tumbler women on ESPN..I've always wanted to do a woman that could probably kick my ass...I may go see a 5th out of town at the end of the month...and yeah that would be a personal record for me.
But anyway...you think you're missing out on something, but you really aren't. It's fun for a few minutes...but it's pretty hollow if you want to know the truth about it.
I spend just as much time wishing I was married and could meet the right woman to spend the rest of my life with as you guys do wishing you could go out and be single again...
Just jack off, it lasts about as long...it's easier, less expensive and the urge you are feeling will leave you.
Plus...I can't always get sex when I want it just because I am single(and neither would you)...
Then again LOL, I forgot, you guys are married so you guys probably don't get it when you want it either, in fact you might even get it less BWAHAHAHA.
I think part of the issue with this argument is that marriage and monogamy are being used interchangeably when they're really not the same thing.
I absolutely believe that monogamy is natural to our species. Sure, there are exceptions, but I think those are probably more on a mental/emotional level (fear of commitment, trust issues, etc.) than they are on a biological level. Marriage, on the other hand, is a human construct that originally had far more to do with ownership than it did romance, love, or commitment. It is, essentially, a glorified business contract.
I read all that and the only cool thing was when boobs were brought up.
Angel_Luv and I are in love.
Yeap...and that's natural too. It's also a survival mechanism...one that is frequent in war like societies where women outnumber the men.
Is it still considered marriage?
Yeap...
Sure...it's a social grouping/bond...the smallest unit. More or less.Can you give the definition to marriage?
No........it's not monogamy.
And, if it's still considered marriage (when there's more than one woman involved), is it still monogomy?
Dude...there are some cultures where one woman will have two husbands. These are rare..but they do exist, they are also a survival mechanism.
Some survival mechanisms work better than others.
But the ultimate point of all this is that humans are not all alike and they often have different drives and instincts.....that's why we are so adaptable.
Marriage is a human construct.
It's not natural.
It's completely natural when defined as what it actually is, a social bond...and it occurs frequently in nature.
Monogamy occurs less frequently, but it does occur in nature...and thus it is natural.
We humans are adabptable...there aren't many no social bonding patterns that are unnatural to us.
Animals are incapable of higher thought and generally aren't as adapatable as we are. They are driven purely by instinct and not by learned knowledge...we are driven by both.But, it's done to ensure survival, isn't it?
Why do animals get in "heat" and mate?
Is it for the pure pleasure of it, or is there an element of survival to it?
Google Greece, I'm sure you'll find all the info you want.
I already know the answer......
You're point was that chimps practice infanticide and that we're better than them.
I just pointed out that humans have been doing it for thousands of years and continue doing so.
I know what you were pointing out...I was pointing out that animals don't always do things optimum for survival...and you stupidly went in an entirely different direction with my point.
Incidentally...they don't ususally do it for the same reasons.
I didn't say it was important...although at times it is. I said it was natural to humans, it is. It's actually natural to animals as well, and so is monogamy.So, why is marriage important again?
So, all animals eat ?
What was that you said about generalizing?
Link to me saying all animals eat ?
So, anyone else in love?
Cmon, really? Youre going to equate marriage with scientific advancement on a scale of "what should I believe and how does that affect my life"?
Fair enough. I am married. Just hit my one year anniversary. Been with her for 8 years (and no, I have never cheated on her. never even been tempted to, actually).It's a also a survival function, depending on the environment.
Most animals don't evolve by biocultural evolution and produce offspring which take decades to grow to maturity and that are virtually helpless prior to doing so.
I'm not saying you have to be married...but saying you shouldn't be is as off as saying you should be.
I can see how monogamy can be a benefit in an enviroment where males far outnumber females (or even close to outnumber), so maybe there is a reason marriage was developed. But then again, if I had to guess when marriage was "created", I would argue women outnumbered men by a fair margin seeing as the menfolk of the time were quite war-like. On the other hand, if some pre-civilization form of marriage existed when humans were still beating clubs on cave walls, I can see the benefit of marriage from male perspective...because in a tribe of 12 people, you want to lock up what you can, in a sense.
Just a guess.
Penguins. Thats the only one I can think of. Dont care much to compare mankind to animals, seeing as our differences far outweigh our similarities, IMO (from a psychological standpoint).False...it depends on the environment and the male to female ratio. among other things.
It also depends on the individuals...and that is man's nature.
And there are mongomaous creatures in nature.
And yes, religion is the perverbial double-edged sword. The greatest ins utions and nearly ALL early scientific achievements can be attributed to Christianity (in the West anyway....cant speak for the East, but they obviously werent/arent Christian).
But then again, so can (pre-18th century) war, every genocide (all of them) and not to mention how Christianity was "spread" and the countless lives lost to that endeavor.
Sure, we of today can look back and say "All in all, it helped". But thats an easy perspective for us....try asking the poor schlub circa. 500-1000AD whose family was plucked from his village and tortured into conversion, watching his wife and children endure rape and bloody torture at the hands of supposed Holy Men...all in the name of God. Hindsight...yada yada...
So....
Angel_Luv.
whott's funny.
(# of posts in this thread) = 1/(intelligence)
Post counts are units of intelligence? And what's wrong with Yanni.
This is true.
All my boys laughed at me when I got married at a young age. These same ers are asking the Wifey to find them a "good woman to settle down with" at work now (15 years later).
Outside of this thread, yes.
I'd explain it to you, but you wouldn't understand.
99% of all romantic comedies and "chick flicks," especially those made in recent years, are not only vapid and dull, but also incredibly negative towards women.
My unpopular opinion:
I think the objectification of female and female traits and genitalia that occurs on here is disgusting. Calling men who do not perform well on a basketball court pussies or s or referring to them as bleeding vaginas or attempting to emasculate them by assigning female traits or using gender stereotypes is demeaning to women. It makes me really sad to see this stuff thrown around casually as if it's really acceptable, when I think it is totally the opposite. The basis of this crap assumes that women are inferior to men and it attempts to make fun of a man or insult a man by emasculation/womanizing him. This assumption that women are on a lower level than men is wrong, imo, and it really bothers me.
I suppose you can go ahead and cue the feminist rhetoric bull that gets thrown around now.
Try me.Outside of this thread, yes.
I'd explain it to you, but you wouldn't understand.
I agree with that (though there are some chick flicks I like).
this might be with the majority, but women comedians are terrible. there has never been one slightly funny woman comedian ever.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions