This can only be true if sexual promiscuity is hereditary. There is much
room for debate on whether nature dominates nurture in this case. Now how
can we justify certain societies having more promiscuous men than others?
According to your theory, it means those societies with high rates of male
promiscuity must have been started with high populations of promiscuous
men.
Just to add my choatropic agent to the mix.
Numukunda
PS By the way, Madiba was my teacher in Gambia High (Chemistry)
>From: Madiba Saidy <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Why men are promiscuous
>Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:02:45 -0700
>
>Why men are promiscuous
>- by James A. Fabunmi
>
>Why explain the obvious? It is difficult to be yourself when everyone
>around you expects you to be different. Very often, the male species is
>confronted with an assortment of accusations, among which is their
>propensity for indiscriminate sexual liaisons. I am speaking in averages
>now. There are women who are every bit as promiscuous as men. But then,
>why does the law of averages tend to place men at a higher risk of being
>unable to resist promiscuous behavior? The most faithful husband (on the
>surface), faced with a gorgeous bimbo on an isolated tropical island,
>has no chance. Why? Well, I have always had a theory about this, and I
>have articulated this theory on a number of occasions to very carefully
>selected audiences. The only reason that I am able to write publicly
>about this theory, is because I read the same argument in no less a
>magazine than Glamour (May 1999 p.306 “Why are men so easy?”). Yes, I
>read Glamour magazine. If you want to survive in this world, you need to
>know the secrets that women share among themselves. A good place to find
>those secrets is in Glamour magazine.
>
>It would really be easier for me to derive a differential equation for
>my theory, but I might loose out on the majority of my audience. So, I
>will try to narrate the concepts, hoping that my point will come across
>somehow. The easiest way to visualize what I am about to state is to
>imagine two separate islands A and B. Island A is populated by women
>alone, while island B is populated by men alone. Let us attempt a
>controlled experiment. On island A, we introduce a pair of males. One
>promiscuous, one normal (whatever that means). On island B, we introduce
>a pair of females, one promiscuous, one normal. The normal male on
>island A finds a mate and remains faithful to her. Over the course of
>one year, they are able to produce no more than one offspring (except of
>course if they have twins or triplets or whatever). On the other hand,
>the promiscuous male on island A, technically speaking could reproduce
>as many offsprings as he can find women to copulate with him. As you can
>see, in a matter of one year, the population distribution on this island
>is already infested with more people with promiscuous genes in them. Of
>course there will be male and female among those offsprings. Lets now
>look at island B. Over the course of one year, each of the females can
>only produce one pregnancy, regardless of how promiscuous one is,
>compared to the other. The growth of promiscuity within a population
>does not depend on the starting ratio of promiscuous women to
>non-promiscuous ones.
>
>The picture painted above is used to establish the basis that the rate
>of change of promiscuity within a population is governed by the rate of
>production of promiscuous males within that population. For the simple
>fact that the non-promiscuous males are not going to spread their genes
>nearly as fast as the promiscuous males, it is not difficult, even for a
>non-mathematician to speculate that at any given moment in time, the
>statistical tendency is for the males within that population is to be
>promiscuous. This brings me to the issue of morality. It is clear that
>the only way to stem the rate of growth of promiscuous males within a
>society is to contain their natural tendencies with laws of all sorts.
>There are two components to these laws. One component aims at making the
>male species feel guilty about their biological tendencies. The other
>component aims at discouraging the females from cooperating with these
>males. We can throw in to this mix the impact of contraceptive
>technologies. The rest of the analysis is left as an exercise for the
>reader.
>
>Peace
>
>James.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Numukunda Darboe
Department of Chemistry
Univ. of Mississippi
University, MS 38677
601 232 7561 (work)
http://www.olemiss.edu/~ndarboe (home page)
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
