This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Banishing the Green-Eyed Monster

padster1976's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by padster1976

Hmm, interesting article.

It has made me think. One gets 'swinger' parties after all. Perhaps they are the evolved ones? Clearly, they do not have the green eyed monster!

The sexual act is how the species propagate itself so I can see how this aspect of our behaviour may present itself as different. But is it an environmental pressure change? I'e of natural selection. Certainly, if the genes aim is to copy itself as many times, shagging loads is fair way of achieving that! Or perhaps its society pressure? Anti or a counter culture, subversive reaction or revolt against the perceived 'norm' of '1 on 1'.

I thought while reading the article that threesomes don't get bad press. Quite the opposite in fact. A fair feature of erotica. (No shame in knowing that!) ;-P

Those that would start bleating on about STD's etc, well, these are consenting adults and if they wish to do 'it' without any form of protection, then we can disagree, but should not condemn them for it. It is their decision and they have to live with the consequences.

I liked Dawkins questions on the Darwinian perspective. Swans are mates for life however most species i think do not keep monogamous relationships. Indeed, most people will have sex with more than one person. So I suppose in that respect, so longs as its one at a time, is is more acceptable?

I think I can guess some of the criticisms Dawkins will face - promoting promiscuity and being (shudder) unfaithful to the persons partner.

One way of looking at it is that if 'playing away from home' is part of Tarrant's person, then his wife should accept it or look at herself. If my other half went with someone else, yes i'd be hurt but I'd want to know why. There is always the case that they just wanted something different. There's another criticism the article may face - 'relationships are no more important that shoes' - merely change them when you want another pair'. Obviously this over simplifies the nuances of Dawkins argument. Lets face, that's not exactly never happed before. However, the article has provide interesting ways to look at human behaviour. It has certainly made me think - why do we automatically assume the word cheating? what do we mean by that?

Thought provoking and refreshingly different article.

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:00:00 UTC | #87616