Re: Odlaylans [posted on wog]

From: julianlord <julian.lord_at_ZVCY5APWTKTHG9EE8OS9gavyoeV3IwLDqZ2zGJpXfFDyFxMWPeIQbKAG4sR1rJsp>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 15:45:23 -0000


Sam :

>From the POV of personal 21C Western mushy morality the difference is
certainly blurred out of all recognition --- from a normal biological POV OTOH non-promiscuous females are more attractive, as there is a far greater chance that your stuff will produce their offspring as opposed to the other guy's...

Males though --- well, promiscuity's the whole point of the entire gender, obviously...

Julian

> I fail to see the difference.
> But, such is life.
> Sam.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ImmoderateGloranthaQuest_at_yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ImmoderateGloranthaQuest_at_yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Phil Hibbs
> > Sent: 07 September 2007 06:22
> > To: ImmoderateGloranthaQuest_at_yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: Odlaylans [posted on wog]
> >
> >
> > On 07/09/2007, Sam Elliot <samclau_at_...> wrote:
> > >FWIW, in he real world, there is selection on females for
promiscuity.
> >
> > Not the *same* selection though, I chose my words with care.
Also, I'm not
> > averse to bending the facts to support an idea.
> >
> > Phil.
> > --
> > Don't you just hate self-referential sigs?
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > You Are All Idiots. Signed, De Immod.
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
           

Powered by hypermail