Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Natural Monogamy

Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 8:58:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm doing a bit of research, and was wondering if anyone might be able to link me to some credible publications regarding the human predisposition to monogamy/polygamy/etc. I've seen a couple threads here and there wherein it was noted that humans aren't naturally monogamous--a perspective with which I certainly agree--and I was hoping that I could get some actual scientific, peer-reviewed work in confirmation of that (and even in contrast to that, if you could find it). Thanks in advance.
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:39:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The author (David Barash) is a Professor at my local University (University of Washington) and I have actually met him. His book The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People is actually very well done and worth the read, if you have the time. I went to a book seminar and he was incredibly knowledgeable.

I think you can download the book in it's entirety here as a pdf file:
http://ebook68.com...
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:39:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:31:14 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:04:15 PM, jharry wrote:
Hey.

Evening.

I know this is off topic but the owners started a thread about what kind of rules yall want for the forums. I thought maybe the new Pres might want t go give some input.
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:40:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:38:20 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:33:29 PM, OreEle wrote:
Take your pick.

http://scholar.google.com...

Thanks. I tried Google Scholar earlier, but I was having a tough time finding perfectly relevant articles and using accurate search parameters. I was also looking at SpringerLink, which has an absolutely fantastic collection of work.

SpringerLink is really good. I think the most important thing is knowing what words to search for. "Pair Bonding" is the key for this, rather then monogamy.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:51:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:39:11 PM, annhasle wrote:
The author (David Barash) is a Professor at my local University (University of Washington) and I have actually met him. His book The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People is actually very well done and worth the read, if you have the time. I went to a book seminar and he was incredibly knowledgeable.

I think you can download the book in it's entirety here as a pdf file:
http://ebook68.com...

Found it and downloaded it.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:52:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:40:02 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:38:20 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:33:29 PM, OreEle wrote:
Take your pick.

http://scholar.google.com...

Thanks. I tried Google Scholar earlier, but I was having a tough time finding perfectly relevant articles and using accurate search parameters. I was also looking at SpringerLink, which has an absolutely fantastic collection of work.

SpringerLink is really good. I think the most important thing is knowing what words to search for. "Pair Bonding" is the key for this, rather then monogamy.

That's what I've come to find.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:52:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:39:41 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:31:14 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:04:15 PM, jharry wrote:
Hey.

Evening.

I know this is off topic but the owners started a thread about what kind of rules yall want for the forums. I thought maybe the new Pres might want t go give some input.

I left my opinion in the relevant thread.
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:55:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:52:39 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:39:41 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:31:14 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:04:15 PM, jharry wrote:
Hey.

Evening.

I know this is off topic but the owners started a thread about what kind of rules yall want for the forums. I thought maybe the new Pres might want t go give some input.

I left my opinion in the relevant thread.

Wold have pmd or profile but they are both locked. Didn't see any of you SS.. I mean "cabinet" members online.
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 9:59:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 9:55:23 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:52:39 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:39:41 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:31:14 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/15/2010 9:04:15 PM, jharry wrote:
Hey.

Evening.

I know this is off topic but the owners started a thread about what kind of rules yall want for the forums. I thought maybe the new Pres might want t go give some input.

I left my opinion in the relevant thread.

Wold have pmd or profile but they are both locked. Didn't see any of you SS.. I mean "cabinet" members online.

I added you as a friend. Once you accept, neither should be locked any longer.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2010 10:32:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Robin Baker - Sperm Wars

Baker discovered that there are actually two different types of sperm - one type is specialized for attacking another man's sperm. His study relates monogamistic tendencies to testes size because he theorizes that men with larger testes are better at engaging in sperm competition with other males and are thus less likely to be monogamous. Men with smaller testes engage in a monogamous relationship and try to keep better tabs on their partners (jealousy) to prevent cuckolding (raising another male's child).

His book covers each reproductive strategy and why some might adopt it, including monogamy, polygamy, cuckolding/cheating, homosexuality, rape, etc. We should expect a mixed equilibrium in nature where different people pursue different reproductive strategies based partially on which they are best adapted to, based on looks, testes size, etc.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 12:46:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
What exactly are you trying to prove? Humans are animals of higher thinking. Sure, most will be non-monogamous, but some will stick to monogamy because of their moral systems (which they reasoned through with their brain). Though some don't claim we are necessarily monogamous, they will claim we have the choice to be - if we think it is the better decision for us and our offspring.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 4:16:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 12:46:31 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
What exactly are you trying to prove? Humans are animals of higher thinking. Sure, most will be non-monogamous, but some will stick to monogamy because of their moral systems (which they reasoned through with their brain). Though some don't claim we are necessarily monogamous, they will claim we have the choice to be - if we think it is the better decision for us and our offspring.

I'm not trying to prove anything. That's why I'm doing the research, and that's why I want links to credible scientific work.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 11:19:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 4:16:40 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/16/2010 12:46:31 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
What exactly are you trying to prove? Humans are animals of higher thinking. Sure, most will be non-monogamous, but some will stick to monogamy because of their moral systems (which they reasoned through with their brain). Though some don't claim we are necessarily monogamous, they will claim we have the choice to be - if we think it is the better decision for us and our offspring.

I'm not trying to prove anything. That's why I'm doing the research, and that's why I want links to credible scientific work.

What are you trying to research for? What is your hypothesis? Researching aimlessley leads you nowhere. That's basic research methods. What exactly are you trying to prove to yourself?
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 5:18:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 11:19:37 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 12/16/2010 4:16:40 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/16/2010 12:46:31 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
What exactly are you trying to prove? Humans are animals of higher thinking. Sure, most will be non-monogamous, but some will stick to monogamy because of their moral systems (which they reasoned through with their brain). Though some don't claim we are necessarily monogamous, they will claim we have the choice to be - if we think it is the better decision for us and our offspring.

I'm not trying to prove anything. That's why I'm doing the research, and that's why I want links to credible scientific work.


What are you trying to research for?

Information to construct an opinion on. It's just for my own benefit, really.

What is your hypothesis?

If I had to flesh one out, my first inclination is to say that humans are not inherently monogamous creatures.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:46:08 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 5:18:51 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/16/2010 11:19:37 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 12/16/2010 4:16:40 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/16/2010 12:46:31 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
What exactly are you trying to prove? Humans are animals of higher thinking. Sure, most will be non-monogamous, but some will stick to monogamy because of their moral systems (which they reasoned through with their brain). Though some don't claim we are necessarily monogamous, they will claim we have the choice to be - if we think it is the better decision for us and our offspring.

I'm not trying to prove anything. That's why I'm doing the research, and that's why I want links to credible scientific work.


What are you trying to research for?

Information to construct an opinion on. It's just for my own benefit, really.

What is your hypothesis?

If I had to flesh one out, my first inclination is to say that humans are not inherently monogamous creatures.

This makes sense given that human females do not have visible estrus.

http://books.google.com...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 1:26:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/15/2010 10:32:58 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Robin Baker - Sperm Wars

Baker discovered that there are actually two different types of sperm - one type is specialized for attacking another man's sperm. His study relates monogamistic tendencies to testes size because he theorizes that men with larger testes are better at engaging in sperm competition with other males and are thus less likely to be monogamous. Men with smaller testes engage in a monogamous relationship and try to keep better tabs on their partners (jealousy) to prevent cuckolding (raising another male's child).

His book covers each reproductive strategy and why some might adopt it, including monogamy, polygamy, cuckolding/cheating, homosexuality, rape, etc. We should expect a mixed equilibrium in nature where different people pursue different reproductive strategies based partially on which they are best adapted to, based on looks, testes size, etc.

Curious if you know what is considered big and small for testes size, cause i'm interested whether I'm naturally polygamous or not.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 1:32:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 1:26:21 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/15/2010 10:32:58 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Robin Baker - Sperm Wars

Baker discovered that there are actually two different types of sperm - one type is specialized for attacking another man's sperm. His study relates monogamistic tendencies to testes size because he theorizes that men with larger testes are better at engaging in sperm competition with other males and are thus less likely to be monogamous. Men with smaller testes engage in a monogamous relationship and try to keep better tabs on their partners (jealousy) to prevent cuckolding (raising another male's child).

His book covers each reproductive strategy and why some might adopt it, including monogamy, polygamy, cuckolding/cheating, homosexuality, rape, etc. We should expect a mixed equilibrium in nature where different people pursue different reproductive strategies based partially on which they are best adapted to, based on looks, testes size, etc.

Curious if you know what is considered big and small for testes size, cause i'm interested whether I'm naturally polygamous or not.

rough ballpark:

grape size = monogamous

kiwi size = multiple partners

Baker's theory is really interesting. It also explains why the head of the penis is the shape it is: to scoop another man's semen out.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 1:52:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 1:32:34 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/17/2010 1:26:21 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/15/2010 10:32:58 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Robin Baker - Sperm Wars

Baker discovered that there are actually two different types of sperm - one type is specialized for attacking another man's sperm. His study relates monogamistic tendencies to testes size because he theorizes that men with larger testes are better at engaging in sperm competition with other males and are thus less likely to be monogamous. Men with smaller testes engage in a monogamous relationship and try to keep better tabs on their partners (jealousy) to prevent cuckolding (raising another male's child).

His book covers each reproductive strategy and why some might adopt it, including monogamy, polygamy, cuckolding/cheating, homosexuality, rape, etc. We should expect a mixed equilibrium in nature where different people pursue different reproductive strategies based partially on which they are best adapted to, based on looks, testes size, etc.

Curious if you know what is considered big and small for testes size, cause i'm interested whether I'm naturally polygamous or not.

rough ballpark:

grape size = monogamous

kiwi size = multiple partners

Baker's theory is really interesting. It also explains why the head of the penis is the shape it is: to scoop another man's semen out.

Wow that is disturbting!
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2010 7:38:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/18/2010 7:33:39 PM, badger wrote:
ask thelwerd i'd say.

she had something on women naturally being sluts for more dominant men and enjoying orgasms more when cheating.
signature