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 10:54:36 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
I'm all for it. I think this whole monogamy thing is way overrated. I don't quite see why people so tightly equate emotional love and sex--our society says that if you love someone, you can have sex only with them--I don't see why. But then again I'm just a geek who has no life who likes to set around and stare at wallpaper and think about these things, so don't listen to me.
2007-01-06 11:04:27 · answer #1 · answered by ? 4 · 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.
2007-01-06 11:01:01 · answer #2 · answered by Issym 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To a man or woman like me that would desire to be hell. i don't believe cheating on any point. I even have in no way had the urge to cheat regardless if i became ovulating or not. i might incredibly elect to work out the source the place you examine this. As for adult adult males, the guy I even have is the fatherly variety and the macho variety so i think have been given the wonderful of the two worlds. The function i may well be enjoying is in all probability the outcast that did not cheat and became greater beneficial than happy with the guy she is with.. So i think i would not in nice condition into the scheme of issues.
2016-10-30 04:50:10 · answer #3 · answered by mosesjr 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What would the biological purpose be of the men who get so many partners? Who takes care of their offspring?
It would never work, because all men are too territorial and competitive. (Why we have all the wars).
I love a good hypothetical society discussion - but you need to flesh out how each group will contribute and interact.
2007-01-06 11:01:01 · answer #4 · answered by justagirl33552 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be a hell demanding the entire restructuring of our entire social, economic and legal systems along with creating several tons of emotional baggage for individuals that do not exist now.
2007-01-06 11:08:03 · answer #5 · answered by ElOsoBravo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your Hott
2007-01-06 10:58:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the end it would be hell for me lol!
2007-01-06 20:21:10 · answer #7 · answered by justmyinput 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋