I skimmed Sex at Dawn
way back when. Skim, because I saw so much of it as pretty self evident to me, especially in the context of having two long-term relationships with non-promiscuous but nonetheless: “cheating” women—in the context of “social norms.” One lasted 7 years and encompassed three countries on two continents.
I pretty much dismissed all criticism of the book that lacked my level of perspective in that regard.
Caught this viddie this morning, a new interview with Christopher Ryan, co-author of the book with his hot wife, Cacilda Jethá. Just under 30 minutes and it’ll give you the Cliff Notes.
I often think that the gulf between modern sexual “norms” (religion inspired, in order to keep female knickers firmly in place until a man backed by God’s authority says they come down) vs. natural human desire is a way wider gulf than that between paleo food and processed crap in a bag.
What do you think?
The Paleo diet has made me less emotional and more stoic because my blood sugar is no longer on a roller coaster. This reduced emotional tenor had caused me to be self contained and not ruled by external desires. However, I’m not sure there is a direct correlation between fidelity and stoicism.
That said, I think Ryan is cherry picking the data to justify sordid trysts .
“sordid trysts”
Nice dishonest characterization to feel your own sense of comfort.
You can do what you want which, is exactly what I’m arguing. You get no more hints than that.
To answer your penultimate question–yes, the gap between innate sexual desires and behaviors and socially scripted behaviors is way, way wider than the gaps in diet, movement, or others.
Rich experiential and social rewards are ripe for picking for anyone willing to jump that gap, especially intrepid, adventuresome males. Yes, the risk is asymmetrical for the sexes, but so is the risk of dying on the job in both modern and primitive societies.
Doesn’t this fall in line with conventional research wisdom, i.e. that when it comes to sexuality, reality and self-reported behavior have virtually no correlation?
The modern perversion isn’t monogamy or any specific activity like that. The true modern perversion is picking one small band of behaviors ((serial)monogamy and/or chastity in the case of Christians) and deciding that anything outside of that band is inherently bad or immoral. I would call it perversion as well if somebody said that monogamy is inherently bad or immoral.
A primal diet has leveled out my blood sugar and the roller coaster, but it boosted my sex drive and caused me to think up more perversions.
Revo:
That’s both a tantalizing and interesting 2 paragraphs.
Ms MG:
Well, that’s what suppressed, controlled, normal society would have you believe. So let me get this straight, women and men will do all kinds of all sorts of porn on film and the internet, but nobody will tell the truth about their sexual desires privately and anonymously to a professional. I think that people who are very interested in knowing have this covered. If you take comfort in that dismissal however, fine.
Joshua:
Yep. One size fits all. Anything else is perversion.
Perv:
There you go, and Paleo is renowned for morning wood, too.
Richard, I see your point, but not sure that porn actors are representative.
I loved my Physical Anthropology class in college, 1969. (That the professor was fairly hot had nothing to do with it, right?) Moving on to 2009, discovering Paleo/Primal, my interests were reignited about our evolution. REading of early Euro’s in contact with “primitives,” modern extant Hunter-Gatherer society’s sexual behaviors, all very interesting. Add into the mix, my personal experiences in mating/dating, the bar thing some years ago, and what I see on the intertubes……… my conclusion is that we are very, very sexual animals, both male and female.
Without societal constraints, the bottom line is that almost everyones loves to fuck. Sure, there may be a parameter to filter out who or where or when, but was it Billy Chrystal who said, “Women need a reason, men need a place?”
The advent of agriculture destroyed this orgy of us doing anyone we wanted at any time because any offspring were just generally accepted into the group/tribe.
Coming full circle into modern times, the issues arise, for instance, why should I pay for (through taxes) to raise a child that I had no possibility of being my own? If I got the pleasure to ejaculate into a woman and she later gave birth and it may have been me, or maybe Yo Dude, but we all take care of each other, whatever, no problemo.
Instead of the old ways that we are all into this together, we have a new division of who did and who didn’t. I’m very comfortable with supporting a kid through welfare and my taxes if I have the opportunity to ejaculate hither and yon (overlooking my vasectomy).
Europe generally, and more intensified in the Scandinavian countires, a female gets pregnatnt, the state pitches in. And unmarried couples with children are the norm.
Damn, forgot!
The biological reality is that “Guys just want to ejaculate.”
That we may set standards about females and their ages and who can penetrate them has nothig to do with the biological fact I just mentioned. Male mammals will fuck anything they can. Bottom line. It is only cultural, societal taboos that hold that impulse in check.
To not fuck pre-pubescent females is a societal construct. Or one’s daughters, ditto.
If you’re not reading Heartiste, Dalrock, Rollo Tomassi, and others in that crowd, you should be.
Traditional religious sexual norms may be “abnormal” as compared to the state of nature, but they are experimentally necessary if one wishes an ordered civilization. I like civilization.