Two different species: The escape from the bonds of nature.

[Anonymous 3]

Having reasoned how man and woman might be two different species and how one of these species (women) went to war with the other, we can now explore what can be done about it.

The first thing to establish is that the mechanisms for the status quo are perfectly natural.
Our civilization is not something outside nature. If we think about it, the main motivation of our society it is the same as any other specie in nature: to grow and dominate. Individuals have the same instinct, and looking at women that is what they are doing.

And there is a problem here, because a natural equilibrium is always external to a specie. If a population of wolves explodes due to a large numbers of rabbits, the wolves themselves are not going to restrain their growth. They will reproduce and try to dominate more areas and consume more resources. It is the inevitable decline of the population of rabbits that will lead to a culling of the population of wolves.
The wolves where the tool of nature to balance the population of rabbits, and the rabbits where the tool of nature to balance the population of wolves.

Could we say that the female human specie is nature’s tool to control the male human specie? Maybe. It would be another proof that we are not even the same specie.

However our society can no longer grow, as a result of reaching planetary limits. Our two species have lost their drive and we are entering in the “mouse utopia” scenario. This is one more reason why this society is doomed, adding to the consequences of the war waged by the female specie.

In history this has been a repeated pattern, a civilization grows until it reaches a limit or women win. Then it falls.
A new civilization arises from the ashes of the previous one or using new blood from “barbarians” (more primitive populations). Eventually these “barbarians” become themselves civilized, sealing their end in the same way.

The problem in our days is that our civilization is global, and the “new blood” is becoming as contaminated as the old blood. The next fall might be pretty big.

However this presents an opportunity for us men, as individuals.

The impossibility of growth frustrates one natural instinct. But because we are frustrated we can look at the INSTINCT of GROWTH.
If we where happily following that instinct, we wouldn’t notice it, just like we don’t notice air until we have a lack of it.

The exploitation and repression of males in society leads us to look at the GREGARIOUS INSTINCT.

The frustration of the male relationship with females takes us to look at the SEXUAL INSTINCT.

The provision and protection of females in our society, apparently without need of men, allows us to look at the PROVIDE AND PROTECT INSTINCT, or as we like to call it: “love”.

But first let us carefully discuss instincts and change. Can a creature change its instincts? Is the creature less natural for doing so? Is it a degeneration?

When a specie is affected by such a dramatic change of its habitat that it cannot survive, some members of that specie may survive by natural selection, because they have a random mutation that allows them to adapt to the change. Mutation and genetic diversity are the key to evolution and survival.

Therefore as individual men we should try to adapt in ways beneficiary to our survival, as this is the way nature works.
My title was incomplete, because we are only getting free of the “problematic bonds” of nature’s instincts, and that is totally natural. They are tools to be discarded when they cease to be useful.

And I will further state: the red pill men reading these lines are some of the few capable of recognizing a survival problem and actively trying to do something about it. This means that: red pill men already possess a genetic predisposition to deal with the change of the circumstances.

The blind blue pill men are the evolutionary dead end, as they do not even see the problem, less alone are capable of dealing with it.

So, we can establish that it is necessary and natural to look at new ways to operate as man in this world. But is it possible to change instincts?

My answer is yes, the same way that instincts work, using endomorphins as carrot and their lack as a stick, we can change them.

I propose the use of a tool that is unique to humans: imagination. When we imagine things we feel them like a true event. Feelings are the way to deal with instincts, as rational or logical thinking has not effect whatsoever to the release of endomorphins.

So, let us analyze the instincts with reason and if you are so inclined you can create the appropriate images in our minds to shape them to our will.

Next post: The SEXUAL instinct.

[ghostParticipant]

Excellent post.

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

Great post and I agree.

I would add that culture is part of the way we deal with our instincts. Culture is the way we do things. It is an action word as well as a noun.

When they looked at chimp culture they could track new behaviors in Chimps in east africa affecting the way chimps in west africa do things within a year.

People are the same way. Culture is a malleable thing and the tool of women and feminism.

The apex fallacy.

The ability to develop culture appears to be genetically inherited as we are much more “cultural” than any other animal. We are not the toughest or top of the food chain but we’re kings of culture.

If culture is an inheritable phenotype then transmission of culture is an instinctual activity that humans engage in. Perhaps that makes us able to live in different conditions.

I would then suggest that it is instinct to constantly change culture for the male and female species. The male appears to be the creator of culture and consumers and women the consumers.

Thus the easily observable fact that men can create great culture, art, music, science, mathematics, philosophy without women involved at all. Not as creators or consumers.

All the feminist movement has contributed to our culture is to redefine a few words and make heterosexual sex considered rape.

And freed the men…lol, thanks feminism.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[Anonymous 3]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

All the feminist movement has contributed to our culture is to redefine a few words and make heterosexual sex considered rape.

Give them credit, it is not easy to end a civilization as big as this one, but they are achieving it. /sarc

Thanks for your post, it is a valuable insight on the role of culture.

[SkeptiskParticipant 3679]

Well, I beg to differ when it comes to changing instincts. I view instincts as part of the reptilian part of the brain; what’s called the limbic system.

For reference this might explain what it is:

Wiki: “The limbic system supports a variety of functions including emotion, behavior, motivation, long-term memory, and olfaction.[4] Emotional life is largely housed in the limbic system, and it has a great deal to do with the formation of memories.”

So, you can’t separate the very basis of what makes us human, though many times I really wish it was possible. So many things could be circumvented if the limbic system were under total control of the neo-cortex, and not being the very foundation!

Culture is derived from the neo-cortex, what makes us smart, planning ahead and doing stuff. The neo-cortex modulates our drives from the limbic system. That’s why we’re not f~~~ing when it’s “inappropriate”, say in front of the CEO at the head-office with board-members as witnesses.

This leads to the fact that we can’t do what you are suggesting, Manfred. We need technology to aid us, as it’s derived from our neo-cortex, to forcibly circumvent our limbic drives. Culture alone cannot help us, it needs something more.

And the solution are the sex-robots, the only “tool” that can successfully circumvent our “animal drive”. As the saying goes, “Rub one off, and you’re good to go”. Like MGTOW has taken responsibility for each man’s lives, by swallowing the Red Pill, learn the NFG and to learn to focus on himself. This should be “exported” successfully, when the sex-robots enters the market, as the pussy-beggars – for once! – can drop out and tune into MGTOW.

"Expecting to find a decent woman on a dating site is like dumpster diving and expecting to come out with a gourmet meal." Won'tGetFooledAgain

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

They are not creating anything and trying to tear down any great culture produced by men.

In 50 years they will be known as the Female Taliban of western culture, destroying and burning all books and even the history of men who get in the way of their feminist solipsism.

Women cannot create culture. The only can appropriate then destroy men’s culture.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[Eric LauderParticipant 12043]

Anonymous wrote:

Puffin Stuff wrote:

All the feminist movement has contributed to our culture is to redefine a few words and make heterosexual sex considered rape.

Give them credit, it is not easy to end a civilization as big as this one, but they are achieving it. /sarc

Thanks for your post, it is a valuable insight on the role of culture.

Feminists aren’t trying to end civilization: feminists cannot even think so big.
Feminists are just doing what women always did, since the beginning of times, just in a slightly different way: they’re trying to raise the price of the pussy.

What mislead so many men is the sexual revolution: sexual revolution wasn’t enacted due women wished to have more sex, it was enacted due women, in such phase, badly needed male support, and by so they needed to give to men a good reason to support them – much more sex than ever before.
There’s nothing new about that: when women want something from men, and they want it badly, then women spread their legs.

Now they’re taking away a portion of such buffet of pussy, through slowly redefining all heterosexual sex as rape, because due women’s empowerment now they see the opportunity to get men’s support by simply promising sex “when women will be satisfied having achieved real equality” rather than having to really have a lot of sex. It’s a stick and carrot tactic, nothing new to see here.

The right reaction to that is very simple: what you do when a good that was cheap and widespread in the market, suddenly become more expensive and more rare?
You find something replacing it.
If you’re used to eat an orange every day, but suddenly the price of oranges is raised 2x, 3x, 5x, you have to travel for miles and miles to find oranges, and furthermore there are terrorists throwing some poisoned oranges in the market here and there, what are you gonna do?
I’m going to buy limes or grapefruits…

SUPREME LEADER KIM JONG-UN'S FASHION STYLIST - if you want a new look or if you're a very beautiful trans you can call me, phone number +85079255312 / mobile 01921421211. The worth of a man isn't the usefulness that women get from him. Avoiding living with a woman, a man isn't rejecting a lot of sex: he's rejecting sexual starvation. MGTOW IS TACKLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONVENTION OF ISTANBUL: http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e --- Article 4, Section 4 "Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention". WHAT I LEARNT FROM A GENDER STUDIES CLASS IN LUND, SWEDEN: every time feminists accuses men of doing something, odds are likely either them or persons associated with them are doing the exact same thing but a lot worse. WHO I'M RIGHT NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1okpAj7Fhw Basically my former life have been a conflict between this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_RQVkvke4 and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIMeyTK-sU That's, more or less, all about me.

[Anonymous 3]

Skeptisk wrote:

So, you can’t separate the very basis of what makes us human, though many times I really wish it was possible. So many things could be circumvented if the limbic system were under total control of the neo-cortex, and not being the very foundation!

I agree with your proposition, and I appreciate your idea.

But like computer systems, there is always a way to hack them.

You are saying that the computer has a dedicated embedded processor with a ROM code to provide access only to authorized people. You cannot change it. Correct.
But drivers for sound and video cannot be on that ROM system, therefore they must go trough the main processor, and that one has RAM and is infinitely more flexible.
So, you just change the image sent to the embedded processor, and everybody is authorized!

The limbic system is where emotions/instincts are processed, but in itself does not operate directly from the senses (with one possible exception). Rather it receives the “interpretation” of other parts of the brain. These parts of the brain process the complex information of the senses, and provide even more data from memory.

In a quick search I found this quote about it:

In the limbic system of the brain, experience is translated into expression. The amygdala of the limbic system processes input from all of your sensory systems — vision, touch, hearing, taste and smell. The olfactory system of smell is wired directly into the limbic system. Emotional experience is mediated by two-way connections between the amygdala and the frontal lobes (the thinking brain). Your rich inner emotional life depends upon this interrelationship. The amygdala is the gateway to the limbic system and passes sensory input on to the hypothalamus.

This means is that we may have an hardwired instinct to procreate, but the image of an adequate sperm receiver is an interpretation of more advanced (thus more malleable) parts of the brain.

So, with proper conditioning, a man could feel an urge to mate with a “toaster”.

Without physiological knowledge of the brain I suspected as much, because of the diversity of beauty patterns, and how they change with time.

This was a great question!
Thank you.

[Eric LauderParticipant 12043]

Anonymous wrote:

This means is that we may have an hardwired instinct to procreate, but the image of an adequate sperm receiver is an interpretation of more advanced (thus more malleable) parts of the brain.

So, with proper conditioning, a man could feel an urge to mate with a “toaster”.

Without physiological knowledge of the brain I suspected as much, because of the diversity of beauty patterns, and how they change with time.

Are you saying that the more a man is intelligent, the more he’s likely to be able to switch to a different “proper image”?

That could be actually confirmed in a quite easy way: there should be a study correlating the IQ with the so-called sexual fluidity.

I checked and I can’t find it, but I did find something still quite interesting – it basically says that people with high IQ have an higher sex drive but tend to prefer sex toys

http://www.medicaldaily.com/research-links-high-sex-drive-high-iq-brainiacs-still-have-less-sex-everyone-else-246164

SUPREME LEADER KIM JONG-UN'S FASHION STYLIST - if you want a new look or if you're a very beautiful trans you can call me, phone number +85079255312 / mobile 01921421211. The worth of a man isn't the usefulness that women get from him. Avoiding living with a woman, a man isn't rejecting a lot of sex: he's rejecting sexual starvation. MGTOW IS TACKLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONVENTION OF ISTANBUL: http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e --- Article 4, Section 4 "Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention". WHAT I LEARNT FROM A GENDER STUDIES CLASS IN LUND, SWEDEN: every time feminists accuses men of doing something, odds are likely either them or persons associated with them are doing the exact same thing but a lot worse. WHO I'M RIGHT NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1okpAj7Fhw Basically my former life have been a conflict between this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_RQVkvke4 and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIMeyTK-sU That's, more or less, all about me.

[Anonymous 3]

Eric Lauder wrote:

Are you saying that the more a man is intelligent, the more he’s likely to be able to switch to a different “proper image”?

The more we evolve in our intelligence, the more our species becomes complex in interpreting the world. Thus we change how our instincts are triggered.

Highly intellectual men are also highly complex. By receiving to much information and thinking so much about subjects, they change their interpretations about things.

But I am not saying that people know what they are doing (to the instinctive level). In fact I think they just get very confused, exactly because there is not a defined orientation.

As an example: people that consume hentai have some different sources of stimulation. I remember one of our members that enjoys Furries.

That is proof that we are infinitely moldable. But we do not use this capability to our advantage – at least, not often.

[Anonymous 3]

This series of posts of mine have nothing new so far, since it is all material that has been around this site. My contribution has been to packet it into a “simplified” presentation.
Now, this post is really scratching the surface of something new. It started several new paths of reasoning in my head, and I think its important to discuss some concepts.

Being new concepts, I am still struggling on how to write about them, so I will start by an example:

Let us imagine that we could have a fully functional sexbot. What would be the model: the female body and female behavior, but only the “good part”?

The immediate question is: is not worshiping the female?

Are we putting them again in a pedestal?
How can it be liberation if THEY are the model to imitate?

And what would result from it but more dependency? Isn’t it more conditioning towards the gynocentric ideals?

And the worst part is that the inherent insatisfactoriness (because we are humans and are never satisfied) would have a quick cop out: “if only I had the real thing, I would be fulfilled…”.

Now, instead of a human female model, imagine that we would use something else. Let us take a queue from a brother, and use furries as models. Hold on your objections for a moment and look at the implications.

It starts by departing from a human ideal of attraction. Instead of soft clean skin (our ideal for women), we get fur. Instead of the human features we get feline or canine features. We could even model its behavior on these species.

It works in an evolutionary sense because we once had fur and once approximated such features. We even use these animals as pets, and that implies an emotional connection/recognition.

The outcome of using this alternate model would be to associate some male instincts, the ones that makes men dependent on women, to this new shape. If we get pleasure and company from them, that solidifies the change. Women would be screwed, and not literally.

The third option is to actually not use sexbots! Because you are inherently reinforcing the sexual instinct, the gregarious instinct and even the instinct to protect and provide. So, a real solution would involve changing this instincts to a more productive manifestation.

Now we can look at the objections, and in fact they are the most important part of this example.

The first objection is that would make men no longer being men. Because real men are supposed to be attracted to women, and not cats and dogs, less alone machines!

It is the argument of conformity. This has been used for everything, it is what we refer to the “shamming language”.

But this argument reveals in itself an opportunity. It shows that there are variations, and there are so many variations that we need a powerful tool to keep people on the same line. So, there is hope to change ourselves if we want to.

And this capability of change and the fight against it happens in every species.

I remember once my mother had chickens, and there was this batch of eggs were only one little chick escaped. My mother had the brilliant idea of putting it on the parakeet’s cage, “for company”… Let us just say the it resulted a very weird chicken, and she wasn’t accepted by the others. So, behavior conformity is paramount for every species.

This collides with the diversity required for the survival of a specie, or the survival of one individual, during major changes of the habitat. But is probably necessary in normal times.

An example for this problem: the dodo bird. For those that don’t recall, this bird existed only in one remote pacific island, and didn’t show any fear of people because it had no natural enemies. The arrival of sailors resulted in its extinction from over-hunting.

Now, let us imagine a dodo bird that is scared of everything, like a paranoid bird. We could see the other birds criticizing him for its lack of “courage”, that it was not the way “real dodos behave”.

Throughout the natural history of dodo’s, they would be right and that bird was just wasting energy. But once man landed in the island, this would probably be the only bird with chances of surviving, even if the specie didn’t. A few birds of his kind could result in the survival of the specie.

We are not dodos. We are intelligent creatures. Therefore we can play a new game in nature: to be different, feigning conformity. That is the very concept of ghosting.

So, combining these two concepts we have a possibility of overcoming what are considered “unchangeable” human instincts. But we must do so without attracting the attention of society, less we face its persecution.

So, what do you think about this? Can you individually accept to change yourself into something that is not the socially accepted norm? Or do you think it is preferable to die with the standards you were born with, even if it brings suffering to your life?

[Anonymous 0]

Skeptisk wrote:

Well, I beg to differ when it comes to changing instincts. I view instincts as part of the reptilian part of the brain; what’s called the limbic system.

For reference this might explain what it is:

Wiki: “The limbic system supports a variety of functions including emotion, behavior, motivation, long-term memory, and olfaction.[4] Emotional life is largely housed in the limbic system, and it has a great deal to do with the formation of memories.”

So, you can’t separate the very basis of what makes us human, though many times I really wish it was possible. So many things could be circumvented if the limbic system were under total control of the neo-cortex, and not being the very foundation!

Culture is derived from the neo-cortex, what makes us smart, planning ahead and doing stuff. The neo-cortex modulates our drives from the limbic system. That’s why we’re not f~~~ing when it’s “inappropriate”, say in front of the CEO at the head-office with board-members as witnesses.

This leads to the fact that we can’t do what you are suggesting, Manfred. We need technology to aid us, as it’s derived from our neo-cortex, to forcibly circumvent our limbic drives. Culture alone cannot help us, it needs something more.

And the solution are the sex-robots, the only “tool” that can successfully circumvent our “animal drive”. As the saying goes, “Rub one off, and you’re good to go”. Like MGTOW has taken responsibility for each man’s lives, by swallowing the Red Pill, learn the NFG and to learn to focus on himself. This should be “exported” successfully, when the sex-robots enters the market, as the pussy-beggars – for once! – can drop out and tune into MGTOW.

This thread is amazing and this answer is right. Low level needs to be satisfied, circumvented at some point by nanotechnology. Manfred: Our instincts exist beyond rational control. You cannot train yourself to stop sensing CO2 in your lungs or stop your heart. You cannot control your feelings with reason, you can reason how to act so you’ll feel better later once you’ve seen a pattern. What we are won’t change. We are made to provide for objects of our love that fill certain requirements such as (mainly) physical attributes. The objects of our love are made to mine this provision and guarantee the survival of its spicies for another cycle. Y or X chromosome will dictate which neural pattern you will develop. The red pill is the realization of what is in the black box we loved. Sex bots will solve the reptilian sex-hunger need in a matter of few years for the Y chromosome carriers. It is up to us to write what resides in the (this time White box) when we have technology to give them personality cores. And this time it will be better.

Any robotics/AI engineer here? 🙂

Oh wait: “the bot will ask for child support and thinsg and rapre and ageaglmaklga and buy a car for her and the house adklmhkaermthl aeglkaermg ”

pls learn science and critical thinking. Good times incoming 🙂

[Anonymous 3]

Anonymous wrote:

Our instincts exist beyond rational control. You cannot train yourself to stop sensing CO2 in your lungs or stop your heart.

You can train dogs to override their instinct but not men?

We created new races of dogs, with specifically designed instinctive behaviour, yet men are immutable?

Yes, the basic sensing cannot be changed, but the interpretation can.

The Pavlovian training is a clear example, how a stimulus can be associated with something totally unrelated.

And being an engineer I have some ideas for sexbots myself. That could be subject to a different post.

[Anonymous 0]

Thanks dude, I loved the video. ^^
Yes, I believe this is correct. It is feasible to alter our response to basic stimuly, possibly in many more ways that we have discovered yet. There might be a limit to our capacity to overrite this impulses on a low level. We can make the association of ringing —> food, salivae, but how easy/pleasant would it be to break the association ass& t~~~ —> erection through conditioning?
Low level approaches tend to be the most powerful when it comes to control. I don’t think a huge societal change would emerge from the reléase of treatments for such or safe chemical castation, since it conflicts with our own main reward functions. I do believe sexbots are a better answer because they tackle the low-level necessity without that conflict neither significant effort from the user: Plus they potentially serve other functions. Our own serotonin, oxitocin, dopamine levels can be altered as our unconscious self-perceived status and dominance change partially in function of perceived female acceptance. This is a really low-level wired circuit. And we might have the key in front of us to use it in favor of our ultimate advantadge.

remove need for pussy, love, acceptance (GRANT it at the beginning) —-> Maximum productivity and ease to swallow red pills (and truths) —-> Better future.

Anonymous wrote:

And being an engineer I have some ideas for sexbots myself. That could be subject to a different post.

I’d love to participate, hear your ideas, give you mine, search for the state of art and study the possibilities. It is so nice to read from someone with a broad and different background. Let’s do this? 🙂

[SkeptiskParticipant 3679]

I think your example is wrong, and I’ll try to explain.

What we men are attracted to, are the perfect idea of a woman. That’s why we love, while women don’t love on the same level. They use.

So, the solution isn’t furry sex, but sex-robots that incorporate the product men want, the ideal woman. It isn’t gynocentric, as it’s not worship of women per se, but a recognition that we’re attracted to the idea itself. And the idea is in our heads.

"Expecting to find a decent woman on a dating site is like dumpster diving and expecting to come out with a gourmet meal." Won'tGetFooledAgain

[Anonymous 0]

What we men are attracted are boobs, ass, and the idea of perfect woman. The boobs an ass are easy and currently being emulated.
My “White box” reference (the previous post I wrote) is a reference to the cristal-clear instructions that we give to the bot. These, differently to the black-box (hypergamy blablablá) instructions can satisfy the “idea” of a woman. The blue pill idea. And it cna be done specifically for each individual.

On a side note: if you have a great perception of self value you begin to give less f~~~s about the “perfect woman” and care just about the same about the meat. And if these designed well enough they’ll give the subconscious feedback of massive acceptance.

[Branched offParticipant 11012]

This is a really interesting discussion with good points on all sides. Thanks guys. I have enjoyed following it.

I suspect that there may also be mileage to seeing that a person is a whole made up of many parts. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts when a man is working well. There is a sort of synergy where the parts work together. One can also observe that when a man is not working well -like say someone undergoing serious psychological suffering, the whole of what they can do is much less than the sum of the parts. A very intelligent, educated man who has money, good friends, a healthy body and a good job can be reduced to being less use in the world than a little girl if there is some inner clash in the workings of his mind.

What has this to do with the subject in question? -well I think that when we try to escape the bonds of nature we can only ever have limited success because the whole of us is not entirely right, even if we can satisfy a single part of our drives, the re-rigging of that drive has knock on effects to our synergy from other areas.

I actually think men are fairly easy to re-condition sexually. This has to do with men being goal driven and where a man finds reward, he seeks again. It is a strong argument towards not exposing boys to a lot of kinky or homosexual pornography before they have actually had sex with women -it may turn their desires in a different direction. I think that this also explains the eccentric gentlemen who have sex with cars and such like -their drives have been re-directed by early life events. Some men may also confirm that when they have had a really satisfying sexual relationship with a woman of a certain hair colour, race or body type, they find themselves inexplicably going out with similar women in future.

However the consequences of re-conditioning a man are broader. say we can make sex robots that cook and clean and are faithful. I want one for sure, maybe two for variety even! But I will still be lonely for companionship and miss having children. I will have to seek companionship in other ways -probably by making more of my male friendships -which is no bad thing but I may feel I lack nurturing a little. I would also sorely miss children and the idea of passing my genes and ideas on to the future if I had not already had children. I think that even if I was really enjoying my sex robots (and yes the idea is an exciting one, especially if they could make them pheromonally exciting too) I think that I would still be less than complete overall.

I think that in the end we have to face up to the fact that we are not living in the best of times. A man can’t have it all these days. He has to face up to the trade offs he makes and find as much inner peace as he can. Life s not perfect but it can be good and the thoughtful companionship of other men is something that heterosexual men have perhaps neglected for the best part of a century and we can enjoy this again at least.

A woman is like fire -fun to play with, can warm you through and cook your food, needs constant feeding, can burn you and consume all you own

[narwhalParticipant]

I think there is a big difference between instincts and conditioning. In terms of sexuality, a man and woman who grew up alone on an island (see Blue Lagoon) are going to interact sexually in much differently then men and women do in the US. Heck, we know that men in women in the Middle East, tribal Africa, etc, behave differently.

Part of that conditioning is the culture and training we receive from watching others…what we’ve been told in the media. We know that we can’t just physically control a woman to have sex with her because their are negative consequences. We don’t experiment to find that out, we were told.

We are also told that we can trust women, that having the favor of a woman is of great value, and a host of other things. We learn from experience that these things are simply not true. Some of us need to experiment for quite some time before we get the message, others learn quickly, others never learn, preferring the lie over the truth.

I don’t think the desire to have sex really goes away, but the association of negative consequences can override our instincts. As humans, I think we are capable of recognizing when negative consequences have been removed, thus allowing us to follow our instincts.

Ok. Then do it.

[Author]

Posts