Article View: sci.bio
Article #1487Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous?
From: Bob Forsythe
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 1990 07:16
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 1990 07:16
56 lines
2819 bytes
2819 bytes
gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes:
>In article <1990Nov29.180827.10813@watserv1.waterloo.edu> alternat@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Ann Hodgins) writes:
>
>>My own beliefs about humans and monogamy are the result of coming of age in
>>the 60s. Many people then truly believed that they could simply shed their
>>'hangups' and by following their hearts could have many happy and free sexual
>>relationships with a variety of men and women.
>>The consequences of this were tragicomic. People tried not to feel emotions
>>like jealousy but did anyway. Eventually, the 'laid back' hippies
>>would lose their self-control and erupt into screaming and fisticuffs.
>
>And what does it prove?
>
>That some hippies followed the Politically Correct standards of their
>time without really accepting them. When they realized that they didn't
>like what happened they "solved" the problem with violence, and not
>by some kind of soul searching and/or agreement.
>
>Not very surprising if we remember the hippies'
>refusal to think one step ahead...
>
Well, that's one way to deal with the argument, Hillel; just indict an
entire group of people. God forbid you should have to deal with the question
at hand.
>>After watching these scenarios unfold for a while and after much soul
>>searching I decided that the so called 'hang ups' were a basic part of
>>human nature and something we have to face and accommodate.
>
>It maybe a basic part of your nature, or even most people's nature,
>and yet not be basic part of human nature.
>
You're picking nits, here, Hillel. People deal with things in different
ways. We don't *always* have to be open to *all* ideas. We don't always have
to be willing to try every new idea that comes down the pike. It's quite all
right to decide something based upon a generalization and act on it in order
to feel comfortable with ourselves. I realize that's not politically correct
by *your* standards, but, gee, we can't all be as perfect as you.
>E.g. Most people are straights; does that prove that being straight
>is a basic part of human nature?
>(Don't bother to answer, it is a rhetoric question...)
>
Rhetorical questions *do* seem to be what you're best at.
>>ann hodgins
>
>Hillel gazit@cs.duke.edu
>
Bob c/o The OTH Gang
rcf@pnet01.cts.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5980@crash.cts.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ucselx!crash!pnet01!rcfShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ucselx!crash!pnet01!rcf From: rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe) Newsgroups: sci.bio,alt.romance,soc.men,soc.singles Subject: Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous? Message-ID: <5980@crash.cts.com> Date: 30 Nov 90 07:16:19 GMT Sender: root@crash.cts.com Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA Lines: 56