The Unique Nature of Human Sexuality (musings)

Okay, does anyone else find it creepy that Marshall seems to know just a bit too much about this? Originally Posted by pjorourke

What?! I learned this in the military and from an MMA instructor.....

Note smiley.

Okay, does anyone else find it creepy that Marshall seems to know just a bit too much about this? Originally Posted by pjorourke

TFF PJ...TFF.

C'mon Marshall, lighten up. It was a joke...and a damn funny one at that.

TFF PJ...TFF.

C'mon Marshall, lighten up. It was a joke...and a damn funny one at that. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

What makes you think I haven't been playing along from the beginning?

Don't you think it's ironic that YOU are on a lady-centric message board asking a "rape technique" question? I realized the article begged the question you asked, but I didn't think anyone would dare, but you did! How hard do you think it was for me to figure out that if "I" answered your question, and worded it just right, I could lure PJ into a smart-ass response? [I estimated my success rate at 99.8%]............PJ never disappoints!.......Yes, it is a damn funny joke....I'm brilliant!

What makes you people think I'm so serious?......<---see PJ, I know how to use emoticons too...........HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

BTW: Gotcha! Score: ME-1 BOARD-0 HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Yep, I call HFCjr.

Yep, I call HFCjr. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Aren't you the guy Nina scolded for making disgusting rape jokes?

Aren't you the guy Nina scolded for making disgusting rape jokes? Originally Posted by Marshall

Hello?? I didn`t?? He didn`t?? He was making a cynical comment and i did not concur. Ar you one of these people who are not capable of READING and UNDERSTANDING before voicing a kind of - crappy - opinion? We have been there on this board and done that. I suggest you read a tad about on how to engage in a discussion.
If you don`t understand something - feel free to ask - no shame in that either.

There are books on communications out there. I can recommend you a few if you like.
And i don`t like you (or others ) reading things into my statements i did not say the way i did. Go back - reread - try again on the comprehending part. You might learn a thing or two. Have fun.

not funny. what does consensual sex outside the plain vanilla area have to do with being raped? I don`t see the connection. Originally Posted by ninasastri

not funny-you acknowledge it was a joke, but unfunny

red, angry emoticon-scolding

maybe I don't have enough credits for that Ph.d in people?

But hell, you may not have scolded him in German, but you sure did in English!

not funny-you acknowledge it was a joke, but unfunny

red, angry emoticon-scolding

maybe I don't have enough credits for that Ph.d in people?

But hell, you may not have scolded him in German, but you sure did in English! Originally Posted by Marshall

Gosh - you still read to much into things. Emoticons are exxagerations of expression. And he did not make a disgusting rape joke like you seemed to conclude. I just did not know how he could relate the article to the rape that is all.

Does that make him someone who makes disgusting rape jokes? No. Does that make me SCOLD HIM FOR DISGUSTING RAPE JOKES ? Again No? If you want it - i did scold him for comparing the article with the rape-idea.

That is as far as any reasonable interpretation would go. Years of qualitative research have taught me a little carefulness on how to interprete words and make generalizing out of context statements. I`d suggest you try again a PHD in interpreting the written words. Its called hermeneutic. Have fun.

PHD in people? care to elaborate?

PHD in people? care to elaborate? Originally Posted by ninasastri

My Ph.d is not in people, there isn't even an area of academics labelled "people".......I don't know to what extent in this country the expression is used, but when you want to tell someone you know something on a particular subject, you say, "I have a Ph.d in xxxx"

For example, if I want to tell a woman that fucking me will be pleasurable, I can say, "I have a Ph.d in fucking you!" It's intended to be serious with a dash of humor.......

Another example, if a child wants you to fix his/her bike, but he/she is worried you might screw it up, you would say, "Don't worry, I got a Ph.d in fixing bikes."

Or, if I wanted to say PL's are dumb, I can say, "You PL's got a Ph.d in stupid."

Or, if I wanted to say you pick on me too much, I can say, "You got a Ph.d in busting my balls."

See?

It took me a while to "re-find" this, it isn't the article I remembered but it covers the same subject.

It provides observational data relating to Chimps killing other Chimps for their territory; which is one of the key objectives in human war is it not?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/no...rder-for-land/

Excerpt:

Chimpanzees are highly intelligent animals, capable of great acts of empathy, technological sophistication, culture and cooperation. But they can also be murderers. Groups of chimps, mostly male, will mount lengthy aggressive campaigns against individuals from other groups, attacking them en masse and beating them to death. Their reasons for such killings have long been a source of debate among zoologists, but the aftermath of the Ngogo murders reveals an important clue. After the chimps picked off their neighbours, they eventually took over their territory. It seems that chimps kill for land.

I have to agree with Lauren though that the extent to what people claim to be wars is beyond animals. People CAN act different. Animals at some point can`t. They are instinct driven. Can i teach my cat to not kill mice but rather resort to cat food? No. She will always go out and kill mice. Can i teach a human to be peaceful and not violent. I can. Humans can use their brain for evaluation first. So , i assume that was the point she tried to make. And when it comes to this, i agree with her.

I wasn’t arguing thought vs instinct; which could be its’ own highly debated thread

I was pointing out that (regardless of the thought vs. instinct issue) one of the common objectives of human vs. human war and killing is to acquire resources.

There was no indication in the article that the chimps were directly threatened or were killing in an instinctive reaction to some event. Rather they had an objective (acquire resources) and killed to get it.

Rather they had an objective (acquire resources) and killed to get it. Originally Posted by EJunkie

sure, taht would be territorrial then. Still you can`t compare wars with that. I mean "acwuiring resources" is not really tactic in wars, is it? wars are mostly political or ethical. They start in the brain.
I don`t think Chimpanzees build gas chambers to put chimpansees of other beliefs into that. The rational and mechanical intellectual approach in which in wars is systematically killed is lacking in the animal kingdom. Plus, i am sure they don`t have trained soldiers that in reality probably don`t care for the cause but make a money living. (I am talking about mercenaries or french "Fremdenlegion") So animals are killing on an exe to eye base. Comparing that to the dynamics of a war would - IMHO - be reaching too far. As all comparisons with animaly IMHO reach to far.
Also - the "position condones rape" within that article is reaching too far IMHO as well. Its a common "mistake" in science of the sociological and psychological sort to take animals and compare them with humans to conclude on why humans do this and that. It sounds to me like "oh i don`t have so much evidence in history" so i take some animals and compare their butts with my vagina and that `s it. It happens all the time.

PJ and I are in agreement on something