ok - i read on yahoo today that women can tell from guys faces if they have a hormonal tendency towards being fatherly types or macho men, and that women prefer to have flings with macho men but make husbands out of family guys. so unlike guys, who natural want to get with all women all the time to spread their genes, women have a natural tendency to want a different kind of guy at different times.
of course - in today's society you can't do both. but apparantly in the animal world monogomous animals lke birds, the females 'cheat' with hottie males and have make love to their normal males to keep the nest. in people, women are most likely to cheat when ovulating.
So what if society was built around at least some men getting many partners, other men getting steady sex, and women getting both the mates and flings with no regrets? Its science fiction, but imagine that disease prevention, birth control, and paternity testing eliminated the need for enforced monogamy. Women could commit to a guy for the long term, but still fulfill her desires when nature calls. Naturally, there would be a group of guys who got a lot of different women, and another group that got a steady stream of sex with one.
If you can put yourself in such a world, is it paradise or hell? Who is it best to be? Who is it worst to be? And what role would you most likely play, and why?
2007-01-06 10:41:10 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Oh what a world it would be...
Women dictating to men where they stand in the sex line.
Men fighting for the attention of the nearest frisky female.
A wonderful group of super-dads sitting back getting all the love from the children & admeration from the women who have choosen them to father their children.
It would be best to be female of course and have all that power.
It would be worse to be male to love but to have to forever share and let go and to have to compete for your role or for the role you want to play.
I would play the role of queen bee choosing the prime selection of male stock for myself and making sure all women knew how to keep the men in line.
It would be limbo a place between paradise and hell.
It would be my paradise but hell for many others. (he he he)
2007-01-09 13:02:05 · answer #1 · answered by funcplinvic 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To a person like me that would be hell. I don't agree with cheating on any level. I have never had the urge to cheat regardless if I was ovulating or not. I would really like to see the source where you read this. As for men, The man I have is the fatherly type and the macho type so I guess got the best of both worlds. The role I would be playing is probably the outcast that didn't cheat and was very happy with the man she is with.. So I guess I wouldn't fit into the scheme of things.
2016-05-23 00:02:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great question.
I really hate to burst your bubble, but reality beckons....women tire of sex. With any partners. That doesn't mean they become frigid, of course. But they don't have the same sex drive as men. Assuming women are still responsible for the mundanities of everyday life in a household, they would not have as great an interest in mating as men.
But just playing with the idea, I would - of course - want to be male. The sex drive is higher, and the fun would abound!
Thanks for the thought of the day!
2007-01-06 10:52:33 · answer #3 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am women, hear me roar, I would just prefer the family guy, not the hottie, they always cheat, bad experience. But, I can't ever tell just by looking at a guy if he is the marrying type or not. Of course I don't look like the marrying type either. I don't look like a girl that sleeps around a lot.
2007-01-06 10:47:49 · answer #4 · answered by amazon 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Break down of the trust and commit factor. Real intimacy would be hard to come by, unless genetically altered. What you describe is a slow road to hell-ooooooh. To say nothing of perpetual jealousy and competition.
I can see variations of the Othello syndrome.
Devil's Dictionary:
"FIDELITY, n. A virtue peculiar to those who are about to be betrayed.
MARRIAGE, n. The state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress and two slaves, making in all, two." ~Bierce
2007-01-06 11:35:06 · answer #5 · answered by ipygmalion 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I suggest you re-read that material. The variant behavior you describe goes on among humans. We are a monogamous species, with a tendency toward polygamy; polyandry being almost unknown. Scientific findings are always so terrible skewed, when given over to social scientists and humanities scholars. Better to get your material fresh, as every one knows the trouble that getting second source material brings.
2007-01-06 11:03:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
i personally would choose to be with just 1 man the family guy. but for others whatever floats your boat man.
2007-01-06 10:54:20 · answer #7 · answered by sarah 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
sounds good to me.
2007-01-06 10:44:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
dude...for real...i was beginning to think that i was the only one
2007-01-06 10:43:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋