Mike
On 6/7/06, Michael Hirsch <mmh655 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I always thought "Dog" was the accepted male equivalent for "slut." Yes,
> it doesn't have the sting of opprobrium as does "slut," but it's hardly
> complementary.
>
> Mike Hirsch
>
>
> On 6/7/06, andie nachgeborenen <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Anyway, funny thing is: I was reading some paper
> > > about four or five weeks
> > > ago in which the argument was that enforced
> > > restrictions on women's
> > > sexuality was a way to spread the babes around so
> > > that all men got a piece
> > > of some action. Can't find it now, or I'd send it
> > > along, but the author (a
> > > feminist) was reciting the major themes of Sb in
> > > order to argue that it
> > > wasn't necess. hostile to feminist theory and
> > > research.
> >
> > In polygamous groups and societies, the "alpha" males
> > do tend to en d up with a dispropotionate share of the
> > women and lots of males end up with no female
> > partnership (including sex) at all. Taking this as
> > freestanding matter, the purely cultural explanation
> > that first comes to my mind of is that the dominant
> > males would make the concession of monogamy to prevent
> > discontent among the subordinate males. The problem
> > with this is that lots of polygamous (human) societies
> > have been stable for centuries, and I am not sure that
> > Gramscian considerations about rule by consent rather
> > than coercion appliy to nonhuman groups at all.
> >
> > A sociobiological explanation -- naturally a
> > speculative just so story like almost all evo bio
> > stories -- is that non-alpha males have partially
> > genetically based characteristics that it would bne
> > useful to the survival of the group, thus of the alpha
> > males themselves, and maybe the females, to pass
> > along, so there may be a partially genetically based
> > dispositions to adopt arrangements where the alpha
> > males do not monopolize all or almost all the females.
> > The disposition must be pretty weak, since polygamous
> > groups and societies are not uncommon, however.
> >
> > >
> > > still and all, I wouldn't recommend that Guest use
> > > this approach as a
> > > pickup line. A surefire way to keep you in need of
> > > giant jars of boy butter
> > > for the foreseeable future.
> > >
> > >
> > > Bitch | Lab
> > > http://blog.pulpculture.org
> > >
> > > ___________________________________
> > >
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ________________________________________
> `And these words shall then become
> Like oppression's thundered doom
> Ringing through each heart and brain,
> Heard again -- again -- again--
> `Rise like Lions after slumber
> In unvanquishable number--
> Shake your chains to earth like dew
> Which in sleep had fallen on you--
> Ye are many -- they are few.'
> --------Shelley, "The Mask of Anarchy:
> Written on the Occasion of the Massacre at Manchester" [1819]
>
>
>
-- ________________________________________ `And these words shall then become Like oppression's thundered doom Ringing through each heart and brain, Heard again -- again -- again-- `Rise like Lions after slumber In unvanquishable number-- Shake your chains to earth like dew Which in sleep had fallen on you-- Ye are many -- they are few.' --------Shelley, "The Mask of Anarchy: Written on the Occasion of the Massacre at Manchester" [1819] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20060607/2db746ca/attachment.htm>