Snivelling New Age Guys...... :) Off on a tangent - ooooopp psy's

[Michael W Blackman]

heee hee heehee heehe
'hic-up'
tee hee
enough said
----- Original Message -----
From: M Holmes <fofp at HOLYROOD.ED.AC.UK>
To: <BOC-L at LISTSERV.SPC.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: Snivelling New Age Guys...... :) Off on a tangent - ooooopp
psy's


> Michael W Blackman writes:
>
> > Even tho I am a proud member of the male species I have never
> > undertood how a female who shags like a minx frequently is described
> > as being slutty etc when the same bloke that looks down on her was the
> > 'shagger' and frequently sows his oats allover town any time of the
> > day week or month?
>
> Hard to say whether you seriously want an answer here but anyway:
>
> A) Biology dictates that male mammals cannot be sure of paternity,
> particularly in humans where the fertile cycle of the female is hidden.
> The only reassurance males have of paternity therefore is  indication
> that they are the sole sexual partner of the female. Males will
> therefore pursue promiscuous females for sexual pleasure but will not
> mate with them. That's the madonna/whore dichotomy in a nutshell.
> In short the genes of males want to spread and that dictates mating with
> lots of females. However when the male puts effort into raising kids,
> there's a strong interest in being as sure as possible that they're his
> (human cuckoldry rate is between 15 % and 20%). Selection of mates will
> be made to minimise the risk of cuckoldry.
>
> B) The genes of females also want to spread as far as possible. Given
> the behaviour of males, they therefore need sons who will spread those
> genes. They'll therefore tend to select men with some propensity to
> stray because that's where those genes will come from. If they tended to
> avoid those men and selected instead stone age SNAG's then we'd all be
> SNAG's. As a rule they don't and the more stable of the adventurous guys
> get the babes.
>
> Not that this is all a result of concious decision. Evolution is too
> smart to risk leaving this up to folks who'll pull stunts like inventing
> Dating Codes and will sue for sexual harassment if someone's pupils get
> too wide. Nope, it's hardwired down at the instinct level where it can't
> be gainsaid.
>
> This, and other very interesting and non-PC stuff can be looked up under
> "evolutionary psychology".
>
> > Have those people ever thought that the world might be less populated
> > with shaggless desperate males if the females were not made to feely
> > shitty about something that is perfectly natural and beautiful in its
> > full glory?
>
> They generally don't. The world is populated by frustrated males because
> women are around three times as selective as men when choosing a sexual
> partner (I.E out of a roomful of people men would more or less happily
> go home with three times as many of the women as the women would with
> the men). The reasons for this are pretty much the above.
>
> Mike "Why be politically correct when you can be right?" Holmes