Bull_In_Exile Wrote:More closely related than dogs (not monogamous) and wolves (monogamous)? I mean that's a stupid reason to say we're not monogamous.

i didn't know that about dogs. there are multiple primates that practice all kinds of sex from monogamous to polygamous. lots of primates, why is it hard to fathom we are so so promiscuous?

Quote:Now yu're conflating marriage and monogamy. They are not the same thing, though in practice there is a lot of overlap.

i didn't do that. jesus did. and mohammad and the zen master of conformity, society etc

Quote:Riiiigggggggggghhhhhhht.... So much better off before we had a dependable food supply and the human mortality rate made monogamy completely impossible.

with the advent of agriculture it became necessary to feed more people. more people more problems. when people become dependent upon that reliable source over time, when sh!t hits the fan it's chaos. it's famine. a lot of people didn't have to rely on someone getting them food pre-agriculture. self sufficient. they had this model that associated the introduction of agriculture the only result is war.

Quote:The developmental of sex via prudish taboo or casual treatment is abhorrent to our nature.

Sex is to be celebrated (anti-taboo) and respected (anti-sexual liberation crowd)

i don't know what you're getting at. are you agreeing with me?

Quote:I don't possess my wife and more than she possesses me. We have a relationship and together we are one against anything that might come up.

so what they were getting at is jealously, infidelity. they didn't mention it, but the possibility to comprehend (in our current society) why we cheat. and possibly forgive

Quote:Actually many promiscuous people end up sterile because a good number of STD's cause sterility.

here's a quote; sexual monogamy permits fertility reducing mutations to proliferate, causing testicular diminishments that would never have lasted among our non monogamous ancestors

Quote:You say that like being human and despicable are mutually exclusive.

men and women who cheat cheat because they are human. they are treated like despicable people

[

Quote:Bitter much? look I despise how we treat marriage, but not because anyone is duped. It's because too many people mindlessly thing they need to find that *1* true love, straight out of twilight.

not bitter. just understanding human relationships more. it's just more proof that marriage is just a phenomena and true love never existed

Quote:And how do you know you will be that person? Marriage is the begining of a journey taken together, in love.

time will tell. i'll try not to give up on her and i hope i'll be funny enough for her to keep me around. she likes when i write her poems

this thread is nothing but married dudes trying to explain their thoughts/actions...if you're answer is 'no' why the f*** did you get married?

(03-04-2016 01:17 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  we are not 'biologically' monogamous, but much like our government, we generally give up some rights 'in order to form 'a more perfect union'

religion?

(03-04-2016 03:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  this thread is nothing but married dudes trying to explain their thoughts/actions...if you're answer is 'no' why the f*** did you get married?

(03-04-2016 03:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  this thread is nothing but married dudes trying to explain their thoughts/actions...if you're answer is 'no' why the f*** did you get married?

perhaps that the reason (not saying it's my issue right now) woman aren't responsive to sex later in life because they shouldn't be monogamous in the first place.

(03-04-2016 03:37 PM)Lush Wrote:  

Bull_In_Exile Wrote:More closely related than dogs (not monogamous) and wolves (monogamous)? I mean that's a stupid reason to say we're not monogamous.

i didn't know that about dogs. there are multiple primates that practice all kinds of sex from monogamous to polygamous. lots of primates, why is it hard to fathom we are so so promiscuous?

Why is it so hard to fathom that we are not? you said it "all boiled down to" some primate we're distantly related to. Dogs and wolves are so closely related that the can interbreed. Yet they have totally different sexual behaviors.

Basically looking at the primate family and trying to pick out why humans are this or that is foolish. That was my point.

(03-04-2016 03:37 PM)Lush Wrote:  

Quote:Now yu're conflating marriage and monogamy. They are not the same thing, though in practice there is a lot of overlap.

i didn't do that. jesus did. and mohammad and the zen master of conformity, society etc

Can someone be monogamous and not married? If yes then they not the same thing

(03-04-2016 03:37 PM)Lush Wrote:  

Quote:Riiiigggggggggghhhhhhht.... So much better off before we had a dependable food supply and the human mortality rate made monogamy completely impossible.

with the advent of agriculture it became necessary to feed more people. more people more problems. when people become dependent upon that reliable source over time, when sh!t hits the fan it's chaos. it's famine. a lot of people didn't have to rely on someone getting them food pre-agriculture. self sufficient. they had this model that associated the introduction of agriculture the only result is war.

It became necessary to feed more people because people did not die as often or easily. That's kind of a good thing!

(03-04-2016 03:37 PM)Lush Wrote:  

So you're saying there was no war between hunter gatherer peoples?

I have something to sell you

Quote:

Quote:The developmental of sex via prudish taboo or casual treatment is abhorrent to our nature.

Sex is to be celebrated (anti-taboo) and respected (anti-sexual liberation crowd)

i don't know what you're getting at. are you agreeing with me?

I'm saying you're half right in that overly prudish view of sex as "dirty" is offensive and damaging. But what you're missing is that trivializing sex is just as damaging.

Quote:

Quote:I don't possess my wife and more than she possesses me. We have a relationship and together we are one against anything that might come up.

so what they were getting at is jealously, infidelity. they didn't mention it, but the possibility to comprehend (in our current society) why we cheat. and possibly forgive

We cheat for the same reason we kill, steal, lie, and slander... Because

Quote:Actually many promiscuous people end up sterile because a good number of STD's cause sterility.

here's a quote; sexual monogamy permits fertility reducing mutations to proliferate, causing testicular diminishments that would never have lasted among our non monogamous ancestors

Balderdash. It's just as likely to enable even more productive sexual genes to proliferate. That's a coin flip. The more fertile man, marrying the more fertile woman will produce many more offspring than the less fertile man.

What's not a coin flip is that many STD's cause infertility and people not in a monogamous relationship are much more likely to contract one.

Quote:

Quote:You say that like being human and despicable are mutually exclusive.

men and women who cheat cheat because they are human. they are treated like despicable people

They are, but so are people who cheat on their taxes, people who lie, steal, bully, .....

(03-04-2016 03:37 PM)Lush Wrote:  

Quote:And how do you know you will be that person? Marriage is the begining of a journey taken together, in love.

time will tell. i'll try not to give up on her and i hope i'll be funny enough for her to keep me around. she likes when i write her poems

How old are you, how long have you been married?

(03-04-2016 03:53 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 03:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  this thread is nothing but married dudes trying to explain their thoughts/actions...if you're answer is 'no' why the f*** did you get married?

perhaps that the reason (not saying it's my issue right now) woman aren't responsive to sex later in life because they shouldn't be monogamous in the first place.

this "women arn't responsive to sex later in life" is horse manure. Many women see no decrease in their sexual appetite as they age. At least no more than men.

And if you believe that a 50 year old guy has does not have a slightly less active libido than a 15 year old guy then again, I have a bridge to sell you

Married people tend to have a little less sex later not because the spirit is not willing but because after a day of providing and caring for a family, along with the general side effects of aging, you're a bit more tired at 9:00pm.

No.

Civilization is entirely predicated on marriage/monogamy. Societies without family structure and men without something to work for will inevitably break down.

(03-04-2016 04:11 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 03:53 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 03:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  this thread is nothing but married dudes trying to explain their thoughts/actions...if you're answer is 'no' why the f*** did you get married?

perhaps that the reason (not saying it's my issue right now) woman aren't responsive to sex later in life because they shouldn't be monogamous in the first place.

this "women arn't responsive to sex later in life" is horse manure. Many women see no decrease in their sexual appetite as they age. At least no more than men.

And if you believe that a 50 year old guy has does not have a slightly less active libido than a 15 year old guy then again, I have a bridge to sell you

Married people tend to have a little less sex later not because the spirit is not willing but because after a day of providing and caring for a family, along with the general side effects of aging, you're a bit more tired at 9:00pm.

^ this.

(03-04-2016 03:41 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 01:17 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  we are not 'biologically' monogamous, but much like our government, we generally give up some rights 'in order to form 'a more perfect union'

religion?

Sex.

Married folks have more of it than single folks, and it's not close.

[/quote]

with evangelicals accepting a lot of what science has proven, over time, how long will it be before christ or your diety rides off into the sunset? you should try my god, you
[/quote]

Religion and science can coexist.

(03-04-2016 08:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 03:41 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 01:17 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  we are not 'biologically' monogamous, but much like our government, we generally give up some rights 'in order to form 'a more perfect union'

religion?

Sex.

Married folks have more of it than single folks, and it's not close.

Unfortunately...The frequency peaks at some point and then returns to the level of being single...and then worse...prepuberty.

Bull_In_Exile Wrote:Why is it so hard to fathom that we are not? you said it "all boiled down to" some primate we're distantly related to. Dogs and wolves are so closely related that the can interbreed. Yet they have totally different sexual behaviors.

Basically looking at the primate family and trying to pick out why humans are this or that is foolish. That was my point.

studying our primate cousins isn't relevant to finding clues in our behavior? just to be clear, i don't have any background on this. this is just what i've gathered from the book

Quote:Can someone be monogamous and not married? If yes then they not the same thing

i agree they aren't the same, but there are societal repercussions for not being monogamous even without marriage. it's expected you not cheat if you're in a relationship married or not. if you're being pressured to be monogamous, is that really monogamy?

Quote:It became necessary to feed more people because people did not die as often or easily. That's kind of a good thing!

they list evidence that hunter/foragers actually lived fairly long lives. in hunter/forager tribes today, it's common for folks to live past seventy years old. one of the tenets in the book is hobbes vision of the early days of man being nasty brutish and short when on the contrary it was anything but. people weren't competing over food because there was a giant world to harvest from and they enjoyed a rich diversified diet. the human population grew enormously after agriculture entered the arena. many of the diseases humans face today can be attributed to agriculture and livestock according to the book. i can't find the diagram, but if you're curious i'll look

Quote:So you're saying there was no war between hunter gatherer peoples?

there aren't the markings on bones gathered indicative of combat they find. i think that's what they suggest. and with plentiful food, no property to own, few possessions to have, and promiscuous women roaming about, what reason would there be to fight?

Quote:How old are you, how long have you been married?

33. been married almost three years

(03-05-2016 10:44 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 08:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 03:41 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 01:17 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  we are not 'biologically' monogamous, but much like our government, we generally give up some rights 'in order to form 'a more perfect union'

religion?

Sex.

Married folks have more of it than single folks, and it's not close.

Unfortunately...The frequency peaks at some point and then returns to the level of being single...and then worse...prepuberty.

you're doing it wrong..

(03-05-2016 10:44 AM)Lush Wrote:  

Bull_In_Exile Wrote:Why is it so hard to fathom that we are not? you said it "all boiled down to" some primate we're distantly related to. Dogs and wolves are so closely related that the can interbreed. Yet they have totally different sexual behaviors.

Basically looking at the primate family and trying to pick out why humans are this or that is foolish. That was my point.

studying our primate cousins isn't relevant to finding clues in our behavior? just to be clear, i don't have any background on this. this is just what i've gathered from the book

Quote:Can someone be monogamous and not married? If yes then they not the same thing

i agree they aren't the same, but there are societal repercussions for not being monogamous even without marriage. it's expected you not cheat if you're in a relationship married or not. if you're being pressured to be monogamous, is that really monogamy?

Quote:It became necessary to feed more people because people did not die as often or easily. That's kind of a good thing!

they list evidence that hunter/foragers actually lived fairly long lives. in hunter/forager tribes today, it's common for folks to live past seventy years old. one of the tenets in the book is hobbes vision of the early days of man being nasty brutish and short when on the contrary it was anything but. people weren't competing over food because there was a giant world to harvest from and they enjoyed a rich diversified diet. the human population grew enormously after agriculture entered the arena. many of the diseases humans face today can be attributed to agriculture and livestock according to the book. i can't find the diagram, but if you're curious i'll look

Quote:So you're saying there was no war between hunter gatherer peoples?

there aren't the markings on bones gathered indicative of combat they find. i think that's what they suggest. and with plentiful food, no property to own, few possessions to have, and promiscuous women roaming about, what reason would there be to fight?

Quote:How old are you, how long have you been married?

33. been married almost three years

From archeology, they know that life was often brutish and short.

DNA evidence suggests we got inheritance from Neanderthals that protected us from disease.

DNA evidence also suggests we have a lot of bottlenecks which indicate that population declined significantly at various points in human history.

The fact that people migrated all over the world suggests that there were struggles to get food.

(03-05-2016 10:44 AM)Lush Wrote:  

Bull_In_Exile Wrote:Why is it so hard to fathom that we are not? you said it "all boiled down to" some primate we're distantly related to. Dogs and wolves are so closely related that the can interbreed. Yet they have totally different sexual behaviors.

Basically looking at the primate family and trying to pick out why humans are this or that is foolish. That was my point.

studying our primate cousins isn't relevant to finding clues in our behavior? just to be clear, i don't have any background on this. this is just what i've gathered from the book

Not in any definitive way, no, it's not. But you know... science can be hard.

Quote:

Quote:Can someone be monogamous and not married? If yes then they not the same thing

i agree they aren't the same, but there are societal repercussions for not being monogamous even without marriage. it's expected you not cheat if you're in a relationship married or not. if you're being pressured to be monogamous, is that really monogamy?

Whether the pressure is societal approval (humans) or species survival (wolves) it's still a pressure. Monogamy is a behavior, not a mind set.

Quote:

Quote:It became necessary to feed more people because people did not die as often or easily. That's kind of a good thing!

they list evidence that hunter/foragers actually lived fairly long lives.

Let's look at the current world because much of the evidence of pre modern peoples is at best an educated guess.

On average, 57% of children make it to 15 years among “untouched” hunter-gatherers. Of folks who hit age 15, the percentage of hunter-gatherers who make it to age 45 is 64%.

So if 100 little hunter gather kids are born this year 57 will be alive in 15 years and in total only 36 will see 45.

Quote:

Quote:So you're saying there was no war between hunter gatherer peoples?

there aren't the markings on bones gathered indicative of combat they find. i think that's what they suggest.

Native Americans in North America were hunter gatherers and they fought and killed other native Americans.

The reason you see less bone marking in pre agricultural society is because the methods of killing were less efficient. We are talking pre bronze age.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/scienc....html?_r=0

Quote:The bones at the lake, in northern Kenya, tell a tale of ferocity. One man was hit twice in the head by arrows or small spears and in the knee by a club. A woman, pregnant with a 6- to 9-month-old fetus, was killed by a blow to the head, the fetal skeleton preserved in her abdomen. The position of her hands and feet suggest that she may have been tied up before she was killed.

This idea that man is pacific were it not for modern trappings is very appealing. It's a bull shaq fairy tale but appealing none the less.

Quote:and with plentiful food, no property to own, few possessions to have, and promiscuous women roaming about, what reason would there be to fight?

1 - Food is more plentiful in societies of farmers / herders than among hunters / gatherers.
2 - Weapons used to hunt are "property", things you carry with you for survival are "property"
3 - Women are not, by their nature, nearly promiscuous as men. Not enough to sate the desires of men.
4 - If you have two groups of people who farm one can farm at place a and the other at place b. If you have two groups of people who follow the herds they will be thrown into conflict all the time.

Quote:

Quote:How old are you, how long have you been married?

33. been married almost three years

K, as someone well past 10 years being married I can tell you if you do it right the sex does not diminish. And both you and your wife will change, best to make sure you do it together.

(03-05-2016 12:05 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-05-2016 10:44 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 08:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 03:41 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 01:17 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  we are not 'biologically' monogamous, but much like our government, we generally give up some rights 'in order to form 'a more perfect union'

religion?

Sex.

Married folks have more of it than single folks, and it's not close.

Unfortunately...The frequency peaks at some point and then returns to the level of being single...and then worse...prepuberty.

you're doing it wrong..

Lots of reasons for the decline....Health issues being one of the largest. Id submit this is more the norm than the exception after age 50. My hats off the those that keep it going. They should consider themselves lucky.

(03-05-2016 12:21 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-05-2016 10:44 AM)Lush Wrote:  

Bull_In_Exile Wrote:Why is it so hard to fathom that we are not? you said it "all boiled down to" some primate we're distantly related to. Dogs and wolves are so closely related that the can interbreed. Yet they have totally different sexual behaviors.

Basically looking at the primate family and trying to pick out why humans are this or that is foolish. That was my point.

studying our primate cousins isn't relevant to finding clues in our behavior? just to be clear, i don't have any background on this. this is just what i've gathered from the book

Not in any definitive way, no, it's not. But you know... science can be hard.

Quote:

Quote:Can someone be monogamous and not married? If yes then they not the same thing

i agree they aren't the same, but there are societal repercussions for not being monogamous even without marriage. it's expected you not cheat if you're in a relationship married or not. if you're being pressured to be monogamous, is that really monogamy?

Whether the pressure is societal approval (humans) or species survival (wolves) it's still a pressure. Monogamy is a behavior, not a mind set.

Quote:

Quote:It became necessary to feed more people because people did not die as often or easily. That's kind of a good thing!

they list evidence that hunter/foragers actually lived fairly long lives.

Let's look at the current world because much of the evidence of pre modern peoples is at best an educated guess.

On average, 57% of children make it to 15 years among “untouched” hunter-gatherers. Of folks who hit age 15, the percentage of hunter-gatherers who make it to age 45 is 64%.

So if 100 little hunter gather kids are born this year 57 will be alive in 15 years and in total only 36 will see 45.

Quote:

Quote:So you're saying there was no war between hunter gatherer peoples?

there aren't the markings on bones gathered indicative of combat they find. i think that's what they suggest.

Native Americans in North America were hunter gatherers and they fought and killed other native Americans.

The reason you see less bone marking in pre agricultural society is because the methods of killing were less efficient. We are talking pre bronze age.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/scienc....html?_r=0

Quote:The bones at the lake, in northern Kenya, tell a tale of ferocity. One man was hit twice in the head by arrows or small spears and in the knee by a club. A woman, pregnant with a 6- to 9-month-old fetus, was killed by a blow to the head, the fetal skeleton preserved in her abdomen. The position of her hands and feet suggest that she may have been tied up before she was killed.

This idea that man is pacific were it not for modern trappings is very appealing. It's a bull shaq fairy tale but appealing none the less.

Quote:and with plentiful food, no property to own, few possessions to have, and promiscuous women roaming about, what reason would there be to fight?

1 - Food is more plentiful in societies of farmers / herders than among hunters / gatherers.
2 - Weapons used to hunt are "property", things you carry with you for survival are "property"
3 - Women are not, by their nature, nearly promiscuous as men. Not enough to sate the desires of men.
4 - If you have two groups of people who farm one can farm at place a and the other at place b. If you have two groups of people who follow the herds they will be thrown into conflict all the time.

Quote:

Quote:How old are you, how long have you been married?

33. been married almost three years

K, as someone well past 10 years being married I can tell you if you do it right the sex does not diminish. And both you and your wife will change, best to make sure you do it together.

Come back when you have over 30 under your belt Bull. Lots of schit changes. Most of it you cant do a damn thing about. There is nothing good about getting older...period.

I'm only going to respond to the thread title, then read....remember, I'm dyslexic.....I work backwards....

they are the synonymous and antonym holding hands together......it defines animal vs human

it's the evolution revolution.....

there is so much more I can state on this topic, but the bottom line is that humans are young in development, life span is short, and control mechanisms are the driver.....

humans weren't designed to have one mate....not yet.....the ones feeding the trees today that achieve hap' are the lucky ones.....I know I've struck out once and many times before and after....

life...........play it or worry......your choice/their choice/find choice and accept

It's hard to describe characteristics as simply being human. Humanity has come up under many different conditions, which necessitated many ways of living.