no opinion about the original post, however i think its true that theres way too much "splitting" and not enough "lumping" In gender and sex these days https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpers_and_splitters … what's the problem with this? a few things, both practical and theoretical https://twitter.com/GodDoesnt/status/1003993476890054656 …
-
-
In aggregate, yes, but a given individual's behavior (and sexual fortunes) when available vs when monogamous may veer off in either direction
-
looping back to this I think the main issue is transaction costs and specifically search frictions pretty generally finding novel partners is a much more costly road to orgasm than picking up your wife or POSSLQ or w/e and throwing them into your bed in the next room
-
I generally don't so much 'look for' novel partners as I am 'accepting of them as opportunities arise' which over the long run has proven excellent at both acquiring partners and minimising drama
-
yeah it's v pleasant to have a low-key harem I can't deny this
-
sloth, once again, proves to be its own reward
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
there's also a possible incentive for the more sexual to lock down a steady low-risk supply
-
is this "enforced polyamory"?
-
is the antidote to Sexual Marxism... Sexual Mutualism?
i wish it didn't sound so stupid because i actually think it is -
mutualism in 2018? wtf you on dude?
-
nobody told me it had an expiration date!
-
all ideas expire once the dialectics they engage with disappear
- 20 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
here's a paper widely cited by MSM (who all reach different conclusions about it). I can't access at work; someone do the analysis for me https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28265779
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.