Time and time again you see women becoming outraged when they are labeled "sl..ts" for their behavior and even more furious when men get more respect for being players. Science has an explanation that women hate. Women are only able to produce 10-15 kids at best (and sometimes even die during childbirth) so they cant afford to waste their eggs on a loser. Their goal is quality. Men have tons of ammo and it never goes bad and much more testosterone. Their goal is quantity. That is it pure and simple. Thats how nature/god intended it to be and thats how it happens with most animals. Why do women try to impose poligamy on men when it means going against instincts and nature? I am so sick and tired of this... What are your thoughts?
2007-08-24 05:49:43 · 15 answers · asked by Ronnie 2 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
yeah i meant "impose monogamy"
2007-08-24 05:58:42 · update #1
When it comes to talking with women, it is not so much about what you say, its how you say it, and why you said it.
2007-08-24 05:59:04 · answer #1 · answered by driving_blindly 4 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Actually, your information is a bit skewered to suit your purposes. A physically healthy woman who hits puberty at the average age of 13 and has a child every year until they hit menopause at the average age of 40 would have 27 children...that's quite a large number. The real question becomes...why would a woman want to have that many children?
A better argument for your point is that monogamy is unnatural based on the idea that women who are in close proximity to other women for long periods of time will begin to menstruate on the same cycle. This is an evolutionary insurance policy meant to ensure that the maximum number of women can be fertilized by any one roaming male.
However, I am unable to be sympathetic to your cause (even if your argument had been better) because you state that "women try to impose [monogamy] on men." (The brackets are used because I corrected your language issue when quoting you.) This is rather blatantly untrue seeing as marriage is social construction devised by men when private property became an issue. Men wanted to insure that the children who inherited their property were truly of their blood line. So you see, Sir, it is not women who impose monogamy on men, but men who have traditionally imposed monogamy on women.
As for the issue of women being angry when faced with double standard labels, that is a perfectly rational issue. A person's sexuality has no basis on their bearing as a human being. The anger comes from being devalued as a person and not having anything to do with reproductive capabilities.
2007-08-24 17:40:08 · answer #2 · answered by lkydragn 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I'm sorry...how does this explain why you can't control your language and go around calling people sl*ts? I don't try to impose monogamy on you...in fact, I don't believe in monogamy, and though I have a primary relationship with someone I love dearly, we keep things open. This might surprise you but...I enjoy variety too!! (*gasp* No she didn't! Trollop! Woman of loose morals! everyone fetch a stone!). So...since I'm not imposing monogamy on you, and have no problem with you doing whatever you want sexually/romantically, how about you stop telling me what I should or shouldn't be doing, m'kay? Besides, thanks to birth control, I can assure you that there will be no children resulting from any of my sexual relationships. So why don't you join me in the 20th century, because your "logic" is more than outdated right now.
And for your info, most animals (female and male) are not monogamous. Chimps, our closest relatives, aren't. The females often leave the tribe to find males outside to have sex with. They have to, if they just bred within the tribe, they'd all become inbred very quickly.
matriarchal societies tend to allow women to have as many sexual dalliances/partners as they wish. This would probably suggest that the double standard we have in western society has more to do with jealousy or issues of possessiveness than any biological necessity.
2007-08-24 10:33:39 · answer #3 · answered by Priscilla B 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
It is widely known and expected that females gradually become less fertile with age and eventually undergo menopause between the ages of 45 and 55 years. However, it has been believed and proven that the male retains his fertility well into old age.
The number of sperm cells that are produced in aging males continues to be the main focus of studies. "In aging men, the reduction in average daily sperm production is thought to be a main cause of infertility," says Dr. Silber. "It has been proven that the beginning of the reduction of sperm cell production can begin as early as age 25 and continues to decrease. The age-related decline in daily sperm production results largely from a block to further produce sperm that can and do mature in the early prophase stage of production. To explain this in a different fashion, there is no difference between older men and younger men in the number of early primary sperm cells per gram of testicular tissue. However, there is a vast difference between older and younger men in the number of late (or mature) sperm cells."
Immature sperm will not have the needed strength to travel the distance to the egg, nor the needed strength to penetrate the membrane for fertilization.
As men age, sperm cells can accumulate mutations that are passed to offspring. Regardless of age, sperm continues to reproduce through division. If a sperm becomes altered or mutates, any other sperm that is produced by the natural division will also be altered or mutated. Each successive division introduces a slight risk of error in the genetic material of the new sperm, which is passed on to the children.
It is a double standard, and you are an idiot. Men who sleep around are whores and well as women. Alot of people want just one partner. What kind of man wants his wife to sleep with a bunch of other people? It's the same for both. You are getting incorrect information, so don't post it. People like you are the reason other people are stupid. Get over it and go suck a lemon.
2007-08-24 06:32:50 · answer #4 · answered by Speak 5 · 4⤊ 3⤋
it incredibly is the flaw on your good judgment. in accordance to the Bible God ordered Noah to construct an ark that should extra healthy all the animals of the international. the size have been given by God. So if God reported positioned all the animals on it and construct it THIS enormous. Then good judgment says that it is going to have been sufficiently enormous for all the animals. subsequently we are in a position to assume, by way of logical reasoning, that their have been no dinosaurs in Noahs time. Why considering they have been extinct for tens of millions of years already. you additionally should look on the indisputable fact that an ark equipped to the size it says interior the Bible, does no longer be waiting to bodily carry each and each animal interior the international in any case. no longer to point out food components for the term particular interior the Bible.
2016-10-09 04:17:15 · answer #5 · answered by luse 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not true that men's "ammo" never goes bad. There was a huge study done not too long ago that showed that men's sperm quality degrades as they get older. Older men who father children show a much higher incidence of autism, schizophrenia, and other problems.
I'll see if I can't scare that study up for you.
Oh, yeah, and it'll be a REAL scientific study, from a real scientific journal. Not any of that "Evolutionary Psychology" crap.
2007-08-24 07:27:31 · answer #6 · answered by wendy g 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Who cares about the scientific explanation anymore? We're no longer unintelligent beasts, we're sentient creatures capable of reasoning and higher consciousness. Just because that's how it is with animals doesn't mean that's how it ought to be with humans.
And I'm not saying that guys who get laid a lot should be considered "sluts". If people want to think of them as players, fine. But think of the women as "players" too. They've got just as much right as a man to be "sexually liberated" without all of society shaming them for it.
2007-08-24 07:23:19 · answer #7 · answered by G 6 · 7⤊ 2⤋
Not all men want to have sex with all women. Not all women want to have sex with only one man. This is common knowledge. Any perceived differences are the result of societal and individual influences.
I really don't have a problem with how many sex partners men and women have, or whether people call other people sluts or players. Who cares?
2007-08-24 06:15:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 1⤋
Show of hands, please - who imposes "poligamy" on their mates?
Now that you've fixed it - if he wants a polygamous relationship and the chance to shtup other women, I'm not going to stand in his way. In fact, I'm not going to hang around at all. I will wish him well and not let the door hit my butt on the way out. There are better men out there and I deserve that.
And people who claim to know what "nature/god" intended are just a little skeevy, don't you think?
2007-08-24 05:55:31 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 2⤋
hmmm, women impose monogamy eh? I wonder how many men out there would mind if their wives "serviced" numerous men? I think monogamous relationships are enforced by both sexes....and I think you are just a noisy mysoginist with not enough brain tissue that is functional.
2007-08-24 06:10:44 · answer #10 · answered by essentiallysolo 7 · 13⤊ 2⤋
Yes, absolutely. And I'm on the birth control pill because, um, I'm secretly hoping to get pregnant and, um, looking for quality and all women hate sex and.... yeah. Word.
Now excuse me while I go pick some fleas out of men's body hair... my monkey brain can't handle all this information.
2007-08-24 05:56:15 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 12⤊ 2⤋