The Relationship Thread

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by WWWP

I don't know what it's currently like for guys, but all the ideas I have for improving it involve deeper discussions on (at a certain age) pleasure and masturbation and consent and just candid conversations about whatever questions come up. This would also involve revolutionizing the porn industry and removing all abstinence only curriculum from being distributed. The goal being to demystify sex - if it weren't whispered about so often behind closed doors it wouldn't have that "I want what I'm not allowed to have" effect. Idk though, I have big ideas but no real plans for execution. This would all also rely on major widespread changes in public education and early childhood education and housing and the homeless epidemic and immigration, etc.

You’re right. Sex Ed has a long long way to go still. A kid shouldn’t feel any different asking a question about it than they do asking about the solar system or whatever. I mean ****, a man and woman should just come in the class and show them. This is my vagina my labia my clitoris come up two at a time and get a good look. With actual sex just show them. Explain consent with no ambiguity. Show the consequences of STD’s no holds barred. Explain the joys of lust and the pain of a broken heart and everything that’s at stake. Same with gay sex. The process of transitioning - whatever. Bring them in and show them. Just totally demystify it. Hell, it’s one of the few things we have really easy access to for free. You don’t even need a field trip.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

I’m not. I do think it’s a false equivalency though.

Explain why. It's literally the same type of phenomena different species. We didn't isolate the gene that causes birds to choose mates with colorful feathers. We just noticed the dimorphism and deduced the selective pressure from that.

No you can’t.

Sorry but yeah you can. Those are very robust theories but they can still potentially be overturned. Scientific method 101.[[

It holds up great and is a fantastic read. Some of it doesn’t apply to insect behavior though so there was more to the story.

Are you referring to ant and bee colonies?

I just want to say I don’t have a human exceptionalist attitude about this.

Now that we’ve mapped the human genome when there’s a claim of sexual preferences and proclivities the next step is isolating the gene. Then a geneticist can tell us when on our evolutionary path did that mutation take place. Until then it’s a big maybe.

I know you say you don't but until you can explain to me the distinction you see between the bird example and us that is my default assumption. sorry. but sometimes bias is not recognized.

[OccultHawk]

The bird without the color will never get laid.

Short dudes clock mad pussy.

[jwb]

It's a difference in degree not a real distinction. There are no male birds without the colors in those species. The colors still have to compete.

I'm not saying short guys never get pussy lol. We're talking about statistical averages over hundreds of thousands years. And height is only one variable among many.

[OccultHawk]

There are no male birds without the colors in those species.

Well that makes it a bit of a false equivalency then.

[OccultHawk]

I'm not saying short guys never get pussy

Holy smoke you’re literal. The point is drawing a simple conclusion for a more complicated behavior. Birds aren’t people and so on. I’m seriously out of gas here. Man you’re a persistent sob.

[jwb]

No, there's still color patterns that are more robust than others. There's still competition between males based on the color patterns.

That's just like saying there are no men who are actually short. Some are just less tall than others.

[OccultHawk]

https://www.quantamagazine.org/males...-why-20200608/

[Lucem Ferre]

But how is your relationship with yourselves?

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

But how is your relationship with yourselves?

I got a big beautiful purple cock that I’m genetically programmed to love.