I like to think of myself as courageously seeking out important truths, however uncomfortable. But like most would-be-courageous folk, I don’t really know what I want until I get it. I was excited to read the contrarian
It is truly telling that nearly all religions and all governments agree on enforcing monogamy upon the people.
What the fuck most religions endorse polyagamy (isam,mormonism,buddism.)even christianity allowed polyagmy in the past .And most countries still alow polyagamy .My coultry allows polyagamy ,yet i do not no anyone who has such relationaship all members of my family are in llong term monogamous relatioships
And can you show me where monogamy is enforced other than in marriage contract ,you simply can not marry more than one people but you can fuck ,date , who ever you want if you are married if your wive is on board with it and no one gives a rat ass.You are barging mad if you thing people ,especially in the west ,are oppressed with monogamy /You are free to date multiple people,have one night stands,remain single for life,marry and divorce every month if want,have orgies ,tresomes,go to any of the hundreds of swinging clubs all over the country .......and the government doesnt give a shit.but somehow you still think the government is oppressing you and if you are not monogamous you will be stoned to death.!!bohoo.
As someone who used to work in video distribution, it's actually relatively rare to find whole movies it even scenes exclusively featuring women. 'Lesbian' acts aplenty, but almost always punctuated by one or more male performers.
General Motors is the largest pornographer. The "hot channel" is broadcast through its DirectTV satellite service.
Pornography is a huge industry. With all kinds of permutations. Exactly what does that suggest about the basic nature of human sexuality, or the evolution of our society?
If nothing else, an overwhelming need for stress reduction. Enforcing monogamy is a huge stressor.
In terms of mass males and females are similar size. Human females have larger fat stores, because human infants require more nutrients. So if you check the ratio of muscle mass purely we are closer to gorillas.
Human testicals are certainly larger than gorillas, but not nearly the size of Bonobos or Chimpanzees. The penis scoop is actually the result of humans losing the barb on the end of the penis. Losing the barbs is the reason copulation takes longer. Which is further evidence against the Bonobo mating theory, since copulation is dangerous, and it takes much longer without the spines, women could not afford to get a train run on them every time they ovulate.
But its a disagreement as to how we are non-monogamous. His conclusion is that we are closer to harem building gorillas than polyamorous. It is also that since paternal certainty is valued in human culture, female promiscuity is sanctioned. Infidelity in females usually occurs only n in cases where it increases survival odds.
His also refutes Ryan's claim that we are egalitarian, and non-violent creatures
Since Harem building leaves the majority of males without mates, it is more stable to have everyone be monogamous.
I read the book, and it makes PLENTY of sense. I hope we can give up our sexual hangups, including monogamy, and realize there are no limits to how many people you love.
Read the conclusion of that review, and it's pretty weak. Ellsworth kindof shoots himself in the foot by saying "to be sure, I doubt that any serious evolutionary scientist, even the most ardent supporter of the 'standard narrative,' would argue that humans evolved in a milieu of perfectly monogamous pairbonds." So, in conclusion I guess he agrees with the authors, accusing them of biasing the evidence towards... the truth?!
“.. A recent study … showed that more than half the young (seven of thirteen) had been fathered by males from outside the female’s home group.” [p70]
This has been removed from the paperback edition because this study turned out to have been proved wrong a few years back - poor DNA analysis - and was retracted. Offspring are fathered within the community.
Female chimpanzees are sometimes keen to mate because they experience general intimidation from males which makes refusal out of the question.
Bonobo females exchange sex for access to food held by males. It is mostly the lower status females who are more receptive to sexual advances by males. Higher status female bonobos are able to refuse more male sexual advances.
When asked about the religious implication of the book the author declined to get into the fray. I think it proves nearly all our religions have been hijacked by the state to preach the party line. You see if we as humans lived the way our bodies and psyches are meant to live I seriously believe there would be fewer crimes and more freedom and less if any wars. Yeah I think it is that big of a deal. Look up polyandry (multiple husbands) on an internet search. It won't be hard to find that polyandry was outlawed in 2300 BC. I found it surprising that in this article no mention was made of the Mosuo. (chapter 9). The fact of their over 1000 years of stability in "modern times" reveals Mr Hanson's question in paragraph 7 to be suspect as just a staement of the party line rather than a quest for truth. He asked "The big question then is when did the biologically-rare (3% of mammals) phenomena of (near) monogamy arise in our lineage, millions of years ago with the rise of humans, or ten thousand years ago with the rise of farming?" Kind of like asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?"The question smacks of a forgone conclusion. In fact the book makes it clear that monogamy not only was not but still is not is not a natural condition. It is so unnatural that countless thousands have been murdered to enforce it upon us. I did not "arise in our linage" even to this day. It is not a part of our linage as linage is a biological process. Making such a statement is like saying "since when did our species change to enjoy government oppression?" Speak for yourself. It is truly telling that nearly all religions and all governments agree on enforcing monogamy upon the people. The government of Mao in China was as anti christian as can be and yet they violently did all they could to enforce monogamy upon the Mosuo in 1959 and onwards. The observations in this book at once condemn all modern religions yet also confirm the basic truths taught by nearly all. Personal freedom and the right to chose.Love and sharing all that is good with everyone. Rejecting all vestiges of ownership of humans by other humans. Every child being loved by every adult. But the author of this article persists in saying "Well we have it now so we now should accept it (monogamy) as the human condition." Yeah well we have governments killing thousands and oppressing millions but I don't accept it as a condition of being human.
Can you send me the article? epjournal.net is not working
Can you send me the article? epjournal.net is down.
It is truly telling that nearly all religions and all governments agree on enforcing monogamy upon the people.
What the fuck most religions endorse polyagamy (isam,mormonism,buddism.)even christianity allowed polyagmy in the past .And most countries still alow polyagamy .My coultry allows polyagamy ,yet i do not no anyone who has such relationaship all members of my family are in llong term monogamous relatioships
And can you show me where monogamy is enforced other than in marriage contract ,you simply can not marry more than one people but you can fuck ,date , who ever you want if you are married if your wive is on board with it and no one gives a rat ass.You are barging mad if you thing people ,especially in the west ,are oppressed with monogamy /You are free to date multiple people,have one night stands,remain single for life,marry and divorce every month if want,have orgies ,tresomes,go to any of the hundreds of swinging clubs all over the country .......and the government doesnt give a shit.but somehow you still think the government is oppressing you and if you are not monogamous you will be stoned to death.!!bohoo.
It is truly telling that nearly all religions
wrong most religions endorse polygamy.And who the fuck is being killed for not being monogamous ,are you mad.
Basically monkeys and ooga booga people have matriarchies and patriarchy is what has given us advanced civilization.
As someone who used to work in video distribution, it's actually relatively rare to find whole movies it even scenes exclusively featuring women. 'Lesbian' acts aplenty, but almost always punctuated by one or more male performers.
General Motors is the largest pornographer. The "hot channel" is broadcast through its DirectTV satellite service.
Pornography is a huge industry. With all kinds of permutations. Exactly what does that suggest about the basic nature of human sexuality, or the evolution of our society?
If nothing else, an overwhelming need for stress reduction. Enforcing monogamy is a huge stressor.
In terms of mass males and females are similar size. Human females have larger fat stores, because human infants require more nutrients. So if you check the ratio of muscle mass purely we are closer to gorillas.
Human testicals are certainly larger than gorillas, but not nearly the size of Bonobos or Chimpanzees. The penis scoop is actually the result of humans losing the barb on the end of the penis. Losing the barbs is the reason copulation takes longer. Which is further evidence against the Bonobo mating theory, since copulation is dangerous, and it takes much longer without the spines, women could not afford to get a train run on them every time they ovulate.
But its a disagreement as to how we are non-monogamous. His conclusion is that we are closer to harem building gorillas than polyamorous. It is also that since paternal certainty is valued in human culture, female promiscuity is sanctioned. Infidelity in females usually occurs only n in cases where it increases survival odds.
His also refutes Ryan's claim that we are egalitarian, and non-violent creatures
Since Harem building leaves the majority of males without mates, it is more stable to have everyone be monogamous.
I read the book, and it makes PLENTY of sense. I hope we can give up our sexual hangups, including monogamy, and realize there are no limits to how many people you love.
Read the conclusion of that review, and it's pretty weak. Ellsworth kindof shoots himself in the foot by saying "to be sure, I doubt that any serious evolutionary scientist, even the most ardent supporter of the 'standard narrative,' would argue that humans evolved in a milieu of perfectly monogamous pairbonds." So, in conclusion I guess he agrees with the authors, accusing them of biasing the evidence towards... the truth?!
See how everyone’s all hepped up and fightin’? That’s why I love this book. Thought-provoking, assumption challenging, fight inducing. Hooray!
“.. A recent study … showed that more than half the young (seven of thirteen) had been fathered by males from outside the female’s home group.” [p70]
This has been removed from the paperback edition because this study turned out to have been proved wrong a few years back - poor DNA analysis - and was retracted. Offspring are fathered within the community.
Female chimpanzees are sometimes keen to mate because they experience general intimidation from males which makes refusal out of the question.
Bonobo females exchange sex for access to food held by males. It is mostly the lower status females who are more receptive to sexual advances by males. Higher status female bonobos are able to refuse more male sexual advances.
When asked about the religious implication of the book the author declined to get into the fray. I think it proves nearly all our religions have been hijacked by the state to preach the party line. You see if we as humans lived the way our bodies and psyches are meant to live I seriously believe there would be fewer crimes and more freedom and less if any wars. Yeah I think it is that big of a deal. Look up polyandry (multiple husbands) on an internet search. It won't be hard to find that polyandry was outlawed in 2300 BC. I found it surprising that in this article no mention was made of the Mosuo. (chapter 9). The fact of their over 1000 years of stability in "modern times" reveals Mr Hanson's question in paragraph 7 to be suspect as just a staement of the party line rather than a quest for truth. He asked "The big question then is when did the biologically-rare (3% of mammals) phenomena of (near) monogamy arise in our lineage, millions of years ago with the rise of humans, or ten thousand years ago with the rise of farming?" Kind of like asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?"The question smacks of a forgone conclusion. In fact the book makes it clear that monogamy not only was not but still is not is not a natural condition. It is so unnatural that countless thousands have been murdered to enforce it upon us. I did not "arise in our linage" even to this day. It is not a part of our linage as linage is a biological process. Making such a statement is like saying "since when did our species change to enjoy government oppression?" Speak for yourself. It is truly telling that nearly all religions and all governments agree on enforcing monogamy upon the people. The government of Mao in China was as anti christian as can be and yet they violently did all they could to enforce monogamy upon the Mosuo in 1959 and onwards. The observations in this book at once condemn all modern religions yet also confirm the basic truths taught by nearly all. Personal freedom and the right to chose.Love and sharing all that is good with everyone. Rejecting all vestiges of ownership of humans by other humans. Every child being loved by every adult. But the author of this article persists in saying "Well we have it now so we now should accept it (monogamy) as the human condition." Yeah well we have governments killing thousands and oppressing millions but I don't accept it as a condition of being human.
Worth reading.