Intelligent Sexual Design

Given the innate conflicts in what psychiatrists say men and women need to get along, it’s a wonder they ever get together.

15 thoughts on “Intelligent Sexual Design

  1. We don’t have to be happy about it, but with 7 billion of us and rising, you can’t argue with the evolutionary success of the emotional arrangement.

    Of course, the viruses both most deadly and successful at propagating rapidly kill their hosts before they have a chance to spread, so the final word is not in on the success of our species. We are on our way to killing our host, the planet

    At least—in most cases—the females of our species don’t decapitate us during the act of copulation, as they do in several arachnid and insect species.

    That’s not to say we aren’t at risk of losing our heads figuratively.

    • Glen,

      Ever hear of a Pilipina “haircut?” It’s a form of decapitation-by-female. Also, every culture has them, and the most vicious don’t even have to use a knife. In America, the favored shaver (especially in California) has a lawyer attached to it.


  2. Lmao. “Women need to feel emotionally connected to want sex,” said countless women to men they weren’t really into. The only thing women *need* to feel is arousal. How else to explain the epidemic of casual sex? Though I certainly won’t argue it’s healthy for a woman’s psyche.

    • Actually now that I think about it, a majority of millennial girls actively *avoid* emotional connection with sexual partners for fear it will make them “weak” and thus traitorous to Glorious Feminist Progress® (“I don’t need no man!™”). But then who ever accused feminists of being warm people?

    • > epidemic of casual sex?

      You make that sound like a BAD thing!

      In fact, you’re an old man, jealous of the kids today who didn’t fall for the same psychotic,evil remnants of the 1950s that you did.

      You’d SURE change your tune if you could be young again. Suddenly, it wouldn’t be an “epidemic” when 13 year-old girls send a full-frontal naked picture to classmates as a way of introducing herself and saying she likes you.

      Sound impossible? 14% of 13 year-old girls HAVE DONE THAT, and 14% was 10 years ago.

      Picturephones never took off because nobody wanted to talk to friends and coworkers in their shitstained underpants. But one segment of society embraces it.

      16 year-old girls strip naked for 16 year-old boys they’ll never meet, know the name of,or even what country they’re in. The payoff is watching the effect they have on the boys, as they watch them furiously masturbate. Then they know, as Paglia does, who really has the power in sex.

      I bet that REALLY pisses you off, doesn’t it?

      I can tell you’re a repiglican because you see someone’s else’s intense happiness as something bad happening to you.

      Sex is magical and thrilling and happy and exciting.It’s also a deeply mysterious, literally religous experience for me. It’s what connects me with all life; It’s the only actual, true reason I exist; and it’s not only free, but with the trivially easy precaution of the pill, it has no bad effects at all.

      …You know, I was stupid, just like you, back when it mattered. I hid from boys in the computer lab every weekend and through the window next to me, watched the naked kids running in a circle around the dining hall, making a joyful noise.

      Now it’s too late. No matter WHAT I let strange men do to me now, I’ll never have the thrill of being 13, just discovering this new, amazing thing, and sending a picture of my naked body to a boy in my class to introduce myself.

      The proper response, you wretched old bastard, is deep regret—almost grief—that you didn’t do the only thing so wonderful that it makes your impending death not matter, not undeserved anger at the kids who made the right choice when you stupidly made the wrong one.

      • Wow…I can almost hear you catching your breath after that rant. Still, a good example of Poe’s Law in action.

        After seeing so much wrong with the world, little can really get a rise out of me, but your celebration of child pornography was a good try.

        Oh, and I’m 27 years old, thanks.

      • 27? Good God man, it used to be the 16-year old consensus that anybody passing 29 had less than 12 months to live!

        Have you made your will out yet?


        I grew up in the 70s, a time when adolescents where fucking their brains out all over the place (before the AIDS malady made elastic penis-coats drearily popular). Anyway, you sound more like a perv trying to portray a nympho. I understand that old wankers like you hang out a lot around comment boards allegedly populated with young teen snatch (… of both sexes).

        I wonder how you’re going to make it work at TRall’s cyberpad? Or are you a 48-year-old cop baiting a trap?

        This is the web you know.


      • Well, *I* enjoyed your post Faye.

        I think women’s (girls’) sex drives have been systematically repressed by society for thousands of years. This was necessary back when we had no idea how diseases or fertilization worked, nor any way to determine paternity.

        Today, we do. We can change our ethics to account for it. No need for superstitious dread of ‘doing it’ – we can enjoy ‘doing it’ without guilt.

        And this is a good thing. While a 13 y/o may have all the equipment to make babies, they shouldn’t be doing so.

        In the past, when the average lifespan was 35 years, it made sense for people to pair off young. Today, they don’t need to, and waiting until you’re more mature and financially stable makes much more sense. But the sex drive peaks at around age 18. Why deprive young humans of the greatest pleasure known? There is no longer any reason whatsoever. In fact, making people “save themselves for marriage” encourages them to get married earlier and for the wrong reasons.

        Make love not war!

        – Crazy H

        Boomer who lost his cherry at age 13 (to an older woman, she was 14) and had just a whole lotta free lovin’ in college.

  3. I would guess that there are a lot of old issues of Cosmopolitan and other similar types of publications for men and women that have dealt with this issue many times.

  4. It might not be the norm – but I’ve known plenty of women who were perfectly happy with a one night stand & were put off by the idea of emotional relationships. Perhaps as we mature as a species and get over our superstitious upbringing, we’ll see more swingin’ wimminz. I don’t see a downside here.

    Women & men can teach each other different viewpoints about sex, and that can lead to better sex for all of us.

  5. After some thought – maybe it does makes sense from a design (“evolutionary”) perspective.

    For a female human in the wild, baby-making is a huge risk and commitment. She’ll be unable to fend for herself for at least a couple of months, she’ll have to devote time & precious nutrition to the infant, not to mention the risk to her life that comes with pregnancy before maternity wards were invented.

    So, it makes sense for her to be sure about the potential poppa before risking pregnancy.

    OTOH, the male can do his part in two minutes & walk away. Doing so does increase his chances of winning the procreation lottery. But for any one individual offspring, it’s better if poppa hangs around. So if that two minute act results in him becoming attached to the potential mamma, it ensures that that particular infant has a better chance of surviving long enough to reproduce.

    “A zygote is a gamete’s way of producing more gametes, this may be the true purpose of the universe” – Lazarus Long (Robert Heinlein)

  6. Well, Ted, given that back when I was born, total world population was estimated to be less than 2.5 thousand millions, while today it is estimated to be above 7.4 thousand millions, the system does seem able to bring the sexes together – perhaps all too well !… 😉


Leave a Reply