 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I don't mean like the type in horror movies.
Read a brilliant article the other day about a theory they now have. Won't bore you with the details.
But they reckon this idea of a woman being tied to just one man [or the other way around] only came into being when we settled and became farmers ages and ages ago.
Begs the question, what if it didn't happen that way and it was more popular to wander around.
'Free love' would be the norm.
Imagine going up to any lady out there (or bloke for that reason), knowing you had every right to chat them up and if you both got on, ended up 'getting on it, like a car bonnet' so to speak.
No guilt, no misunderstanding or angry spouses to spoil the fun.
VD would probably be through the bloody roof but we'd probably all be a lot more chilled out?
I can think of a few MILFs I secretly perv on I would be straight round to... probably get the cold shoulder, but what the hell.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
if you drink STOP!
if you don't START!
the world would be run by a bigger bunch of bastards if everybody just fucked who they want when they want!
stories and fantasy..... that way  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"if you drink STOP!
if you don't START!
the world would be run by a bigger bunch of bastards if everybody just fucked who they want when they want!
stories and fantasy..... that way "
Lol.
Just wondering... chill! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Turn it all on its head, and people would probably be looking for that one kinky person to fuck monogamously ...   "
You know what?
You're right.
We'd be on sites now saying things like... "wanna be exclusive with me?"
Lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
People would still get jealous and possessive, there'd just be no stigma surrounding promiscuity. Marriage has been around for centuries as well, or at least ceremonies where people declare their exclusivity in a relationship.
It does make sense that once people became property owners they started using legal ways of passing down that property to their own children, and planned for that by having sex after the legal ceremony was finished. But it is thought that at least 10% of kids don't have the dad they think they have so it didn't work fully but has worked to a degree.
I doubt it's ever been normal to just wander round and fuck anyone, most people don't do something for nothing, they do things for the benefit it brings themselves. Tribes often have an alpha male though, so it'd be like fab where a small amount of guys get all the women and everyone else gets nothing.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't mean like the type in horror movies.
Read a brilliant article the other day about a theory they now have. Won't bore you with the details.
But they reckon this idea of a woman being tied to just one man [or the other way around] only came into being when we settled and became farmers ages and ages ago.
Begs the question, what if it didn't happen that way and it was more popular to wander around.
'Free love' would be the norm.
Imagine going up to any lady out there (or bloke for that reason), knowing you had every right to chat them up and if you both got on, ended up 'getting on it, like a car bonnet' so to speak.
No guilt, no misunderstanding or angry spouses to spoil the fun.
VD would probably be through the bloody roof but we'd probably all be a lot more chilled out?
I can think of a few MILFs I secretly perv on I would be straight round to... probably get the cold shoulder, but what the hell.
"
But lots of places historically do not have a culture of monogamy? Harems of wives have been a thing for thousands of years, so have sex slaves and concubines, and those aren't tied to nomadic peoples alone but to settled civilisations?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"People would still get jealous and possessive, there'd just be no stigma surrounding promiscuity. Marriage has been around for centuries as well, or at least ceremonies where people declare their exclusivity in a relationship.
It does make sense that once people became property owners they started using legal ways of passing down that property to their own children, and planned for that by having sex after the legal ceremony was finished. But it is thought that at least 10% of kids don't have the dad they think they have so it didn't work fully but has worked to a degree.
I doubt it's ever been normal to just wander round and fuck anyone, most people don't do something for nothing, they do things for the benefit it brings themselves. Tribes often have an alpha male though, so it'd be like fab where a small amount of guys get all the women and everyone else gets nothing.
"
Very well thought out point.
You explained the theory behind it.
Interesting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don't mean like the type in horror movies.
Read a brilliant article the other day about a theory they now have. Won't bore you with the details.
But they reckon this idea of a woman being tied to just one man [or the other way around] only came into being when we settled and became farmers ages and ages ago.
Begs the question, what if it didn't happen that way and it was more popular to wander around.
'Free love' would be the norm.
Imagine going up to any lady out there (or bloke for that reason), knowing you had every right to chat them up and if you both got on, ended up 'getting on it, like a car bonnet' so to speak.
No guilt, no misunderstanding or angry spouses to spoil the fun.
VD would probably be through the bloody roof but we'd probably all be a lot more chilled out?
I can think of a few MILFs I secretly perv on I would be straight round to... probably get the cold shoulder, but what the hell.
But lots of places historically do not have a culture of monogamy? Harems of wives have been a thing for thousands of years, so have sex slaves and concubines, and those aren't tied to nomadic peoples alone but to settled civilisations?
"
That might be the flaw in the theory... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People would still get jealous and possessive, there'd just be no stigma surrounding promiscuity. Marriage has been around for centuries as well, or at least ceremonies where people declare their exclusivity in a relationship.
It does make sense that once people became property owners they started using legal ways of passing down that property to their own children, and planned for that by having sex after the legal ceremony was finished. But it is thought that at least 10% of kids don't have the dad they think they have so it didn't work fully but has worked to a degree.
I doubt it's ever been normal to just wander round and fuck anyone, most people don't do something for nothing, they do things for the benefit it brings themselves. Tribes often have an alpha male though, so it'd be like fab where a small amount of guys get all the women and everyone else gets nothing.
Very well thought out point.
You explained the theory behind it.
Interesting."
I've studied anthropology, psychology, history, animal behaviour and love studying people/animals overall.  Can learn a lot about everything from just these things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think more likely the stages of becoming farmers and forming community groups were interlinked ie. if they hadn't happened the human race would never have evolved as it has. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
I've studied anthropology, psychology, history, animal behaviour and love studying people/animals overall. Can learn a lot about everything from just these things."
Are you from the fabled Sydney University? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think more likely the stages of becoming farmers and forming community groups were interlinked ie. if they hadn't happened the human race would never have evolved as it has."
Very true. We are just talking hypothetically tho |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think it may well be innate sometimes too - geese and other 'life pair bonding' creatures aren't farmers. I think children beg the need for commitment don't they?"
I reckon we would still pair off... it is instinctive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think more likely the stages of becoming farmers and forming community groups were interlinked ie. if they hadn't happened the human race would never have evolved as it has.
Very true. We are just talking hypothetically tho"
Point was that in answer to your hypothetical question - it would be irrelevant because we wouldn't be having this hypothetical discussion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think it may well be innate sometimes too - geese and other 'life pair bonding' creatures aren't farmers. I think children beg the need for commitment don't they?
I reckon we would still pair off... it is instinctive."
It is to me, definitely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think it may well be innate sometimes too - geese and other 'life pair bonding' creatures aren't farmers. I think children beg the need for commitment don't they?
I reckon we would still pair off... it is instinctive."
I don't think it's instinctive for everyone, people who get a lot of offers (for whatever reasons) might be tempted to take them and not remain exclusive. In fact, being able to cheat is the main reason why people cheat in the first place.
I do think some people are much to reliant on others for their own well being and happiness, and any other needs they have. In fact we have, historically, constructed whole societies where it was ok to use others, by force, to enable your own meets to be met. Women were the property of men and could be raped by them, heirarchies were created so that some people were slaves by force, slaves were killed when they tried to get their rights, people have often lost autonomy over their own bodies and lives and had to fight to get that back, and even today we can see their are still some problems with this, and it's partly societal pressure and partly down to not knowing what is fair as well.
And i'm not that much of a believer of the hunter/gatherer theories either, when it comes to providing for children. Either parent, or anyone in a community, can provide for those needing provisions, when allowed to.
We are so far removed from natural now, and have been for centuries, that we'll never know what is natural, dependent on what you would like to class as natural? For me natural would mean you'd really get to do what you want without pressure from anyone else, don't know if that exists in nature at all though among intelligent beings.
No i'm not from sydney uni lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think more likely the stages of becoming farmers and forming community groups were interlinked ie. if they hadn't happened the human race would never have evolved as it has.
Very true. We are just talking hypothetically tho
Point was that in answer to your hypothetical question - it would be irrelevant because we wouldn't be having this hypothetical discussion"
ouch. that makes my brain hurt. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think more likely the stages of becoming farmers and forming community groups were interlinked ie. if they hadn't happened the human race would never have evolved as it has.
Very true. We are just talking hypothetically tho
Point was that in answer to your hypothetical question - it would be irrelevant because we wouldn't be having this hypothetical discussion
ouch. that makes my brain hurt. "
Mine too |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm not sure what 'hunter gatherer theories' are other than the stage prior to humans becoming agriculturists - or is that in question?!
People have been exploited all through the history of the human race - but there has also been family units going as far back as is known too - they caused much of that oppression you mention.. and still do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"For me natural would mean you'd really get to do what you want without pressure..."
Or maybe being comfortable enough in yourself to know there is no right or wrong... only what is right for 'me' at this moment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"For me natural would mean you'd really get to do what you want without pressure...
Or maybe being comfortable enough in yourself to know there is no right or wrong... only what is right for 'me' at this moment."
And to know that other people have rights too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm not sure what 'hunter gatherer theories' are other than the stage prior to humans becoming agriculturists - or is that in question?!
People have been exploited all through the history of the human race - but there has also been family units going as far back as is known too - they caused much of that oppression you mention.. and still do "
That men and women coupled up to provide for their kids. Like it's necessary to do so.
Most humans just want to provide for their kids overall, they made those kids themselves and want to look after them, although we can see that some people don't care i do think it's more natural to want to look after your own children and take care of them, it would make sense that people would want to couple up to do that but it wouldn't be necessary. Not sure what you mean by families being oppressive? Most people tend to neglect their kids i've noticed, rather than oppress them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Oh people definitely didn't couple up in that way until relatively recently - loads of stuff about old cultures with men having multiple wives, 'marriage' being a short term thing, women being possessions etc.
I didn't mean oppression within families. I was referencing the oppression of society by a minority of families - monarchies for example. Again essential to how we came to be.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Oh people definitely didn't couple up in that way until relatively recently - loads of stuff about old cultures with men having multiple wives, 'marriage' being a short term thing, women being possessions etc.
I didn't mean oppression within families. I was referencing the oppression of society by a minority of families - monarchies for example. Again essential to how we came to be.
"
That makes more sense about the oppression, thanks for explaining. And yes i agree with you.
I think we're a bit fucked up by them though, and i don't like their agendas or how they've given themselves special statuses and privileges, and how there isn't really anywhere proper to escape from their society that they created. You can become a criminal to escape them but even then that's not really fair. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Oh for sure - it's totally wrong by our modern sensibilities - but perplexing that so much of our progress has required exploitation and all sorts of nasty stuff.
It did however also lead to opportunities for really good sex via modern day gadgets |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Oh for sure - it's totally wrong by our modern sensibilities - but perplexing that so much of our progress has required exploitation and all sorts of nasty stuff.
It did however also lead to opportunities for really good sex via modern day gadgets "
Haha. I'm not that into them but get what you mean.
I do think and wonder about why exploitation exists and why everything isn't fair despite a good majority of people being fair and agreeing with fairness. I don't know everything but i do suspect people are more selfish than they care to admit and that they maybe wanted all this and even without ignorance they don't really care. Society are pretty insular easily enough and i don't blame the government for that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *jandjbCouple
over a year ago
Nr Manchester |
Have you ever wondered about the shape of the glans (head of penis). It is shaped like it is so that while penetrating and ejaculating it can also scoop out any semen already in the vagina (from intercourse with another male presumably).
That said we have probably evolved to rear children to adulthood, who can then leave home (not happened in our house though lol) which is why long term relationships may not last for ever - or indeed designed to last forever).
Having said that one of the reasons we started swinging a year ago, well into middle age, was to nurture our relationship.
Him |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Yeah i have, i wanted to learn all i could about cuckolding and that came up. Love how it goes against the women shouldn't be promiscuous theories. Most sperm hide in the cervix anyway waiting for an egg to be released so those sperms won't get scooped out as it's impossible to do that. And the fact that the first sperm to get to the egg just bash it and don't necessarily fertilise it because a sneaky sperm gets in instead.
But before i learned about all that i did think to myself that it would be more beneficial for women to have multiple partners because, although there's already billions of sperm from one man competing for the egg, even more mens sperm competing might create the best child. Not including STIs of course, some of which can harm/deform the foetus or can even kill it. And ignoring mutations as well. I think this is the main reason why people don't like others interfering with nature, because it does often bring up new problems we have to deal with but we find ways eventually and justify what happens, often without thinking about it too much though.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Yeah i have, i wanted to learn all i could about cuckolding and that came up. Love how it goes against the women shouldn't be promiscuous theories. Most sperm hide in the cervix anyway waiting for an egg to be released so those sperms won't get scooped out as it's impossible to do that. And the fact that the first sperm to get to the egg just bash it and don't necessarily fertilise it because a sneaky sperm gets in instead.
But before i learned about all that i did think to myself that it would be more beneficial for women to have multiple partners because, although there's already billions of sperm from one man competing for the egg, even more mens sperm competing might create the best child. Not including STIs of course, some of which can harm/deform the foetus or can even kill it. And ignoring mutations as well. I think this is the main reason why people don't like others interfering with nature, because it does often bring up new problems we have to deal with but we find ways eventually and justify what happens, often without thinking about it too much though.
"
wow. thats a whole doctoral thesis in one paragraph... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
