Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

mcgeedo · 11-26-2010, 05:39 PM

OP seems a little ticked that no one has engaged him in his commentary and has just dismissed him as a troll/misogynist. I have a thought or two on some of the topics that he's raised.

I believe that there are two parts to fundamental human behaviors. There's the part that is based on the evolution of the species. It's a success trait for the species for a woman to be interested in establishing a stable relationship. That's also a success trait for a man since it's his offspring that benefit. There's probably a competing instinct to spread genes. That's most likely true for men and (I read somewhere) also a benefit to a woman in the context of genetic diversity. A balance seems to have developed between these two instincts, favoring a stable relationship.

Then there's the part of behavior that is learned as opposed to instinctive. It's important to remember that the species hasn't evolved all that much in several thousand years. Culture and civilization are relatively new to us, but we are essentially the same as we were 8 or 10 thousand years ago, before any vestige of civilization developed. The difference between then and now is the body of collective knowledge, expressed in willful behavior as opposed to instinctive.

The OP would like, I think, to justify his choices and desires by ignoring the second part and at least part of the first part. In short, whatever it takes in order to validate prostitution-based promiscuity. I wonder why he feels the need for such validation? By choosing to be single and by choosing to not procreate, he then has the freedom of action to do as he will (within the law). With a little effort, he should find plenty of willing partners. With no effort at all, he can purchase sex at will. I wonder if the "no effort at all" has something to do with it?

---------- Post added at 08:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:34 PM ----------

"All of this subject matter must be brought up in attempt to highlight those men who are sympathetic of the message, and to inoculate the conversation of fathers and other romantics."

Why? Brought up by whom, to what purpose?

11-26-2010, 05:39 PM	#33 (permalink)
mcgeedo Crazy	OP seems a little ticked that no one has engaged him in his commentary and has just dismissed him as a troll/misogynist. I have a thought or two on some of the topics that he's raised. I believe that there are two parts to fundamental human behaviors. There's the part that is based on the evolution of the species. It's a success trait for the species for a woman to be interested in establishing a stable relationship. That's also a success trait for a man since it's his offspring that benefit. There's probably a competing instinct to spread genes. That's most likely true for men and (I read somewhere) also a benefit to a woman in the context of genetic diversity. A balance seems to have developed between these two instincts, favoring a stable relationship. Then there's the part of behavior that is learned as opposed to instinctive. It's important to remember that the species hasn't evolved all that much in several thousand years. Culture and civilization are relatively new to us, but we are essentially the same as we were 8 or 10 thousand years ago, before any vestige of civilization developed. The difference between then and now is the body of collective knowledge, expressed in willful behavior as opposed to instinctive. The OP would like, I think, to justify his choices and desires by ignoring the second part and at least part of the first part. In short, whatever it takes in order to validate prostitution-based promiscuity. I wonder why he feels the need for such validation? By choosing to be single and by choosing to not procreate, he then has the freedom of action to do as he will (within the law). With a little effort, he should find plenty of willing partners. With no effort at all, he can purchase sex at will. I wonder if the "no effort at all" has something to do with it? ---------- Post added at 08:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:34 PM ---------- "All of this subject matter must be brought up in attempt to highlight those men who are sympathetic of the message, and to inoculate the conversation of fathers and other romantics." Why? Brought up by whom, to what purpose?