Book: Sex at Dawn

[MonoVCPHG]

Originally Posted by nycindie

Still haven't read it, Mono?

Well it was on my table for a few a day...does that count?

I can't read it Cindie. I know I would do so with the intent to support my belief that early human sexual behaviour has no application in a modern world.

I think the article I posted sums up my uninformed thoughts with an informed opinion.

[River]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

One sex therapists take on the popular interpretation of Sex at Dawn

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...ce-sex-therapy

From that article:

"Human nature? It's the bananas, stupid.

During Jane Goodall's first four years studying chimpanzees in Tanzania, according to Sex at Dawn, she observed them to be remarkably peaceful creatures. But they were difficult to observe, since they tended not to hang around her camp much. So she tried to attract them nearer by regularly feeding them bananas. The effect, evidently, was to make the chimpanzees more aggressive. Fighting between them increased dramatically.

Now, which represented the chimpanzee's true nature? The gentle chimpanzees happily feeding far apart in the forest, not bothering each other? Or the hoodlum chimpanzees shoving each other out of the way at the daily banana trough?

The answer, as Ryan and Jetha eloquently express, is neither. It's like asking whether water's true nature is ice or liquid. It all depends on the conditions. Change the conditions, and you change which of many potential natures will be manifest."


......................

This is such a true thing, and an excellent conceptual structure for understanding the practice of Buddha Dharma. In Buddha Dharma, we become what we practice at being. If we practice at being unkind, we become unkind. If we practice kindness, we become kind.... Our practice is part of the set of "conditions" which make up what we are and what we may become.

[MonoVCPHG]

Originally Posted by River

Our practice is part of the set of "conditions" which make up what we are and what we may become.

Nice quote River. I need to become more silent..which means I should practice being quiet

[River]

The kind of early human social structure that encouraged sexual promiscuity was a delicate thing. It required a small tightly-knit group of less than 150 individuals, an abundant natural food supply, and an inability to hoard resources. As I look out my front door in New York City, I don't detect much potential for the establishment of that kind of social order. It's strictly big boxes of bananas, all the way up Columbus Avenue.

Yet the popular buzz in the book's first month seems to miss all of this. "We're really meant to be promiscuous!" yell the headlines.

No. The reality is more sobering. The material conditions that would permit a stable culture of sexual promiscuity are long since gone.

From the same article (linked above).

=====


The social conditions may be different for most people, but the basic biology (our bodies) isn't so much different at all. Our bodies are the same, essentially, as the bodies of our Pleistocene ancestors.

Humans During the Pleistocene:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleisto...he_Pleistocene

[nycindie]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

I can't read it Cindie. I know I would do so with the intent to support my belief that early human sexual behaviour has no application in a modern world.

Yeah, so why not! It is also a very entertaining read.

[redpepper]

My mono co-worker is reading it. She's really enjoying it and finding it interesting. Still mono but at least recognizes that really, life long monogamy is likely not natural. She doesn't understand why anyone would want to bother with non-monogamy. She says that one man is all she can handle to many othrer things to do.