Difference between revisions of "2008-07-18 Girls gone guilty"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(new page from form at http://issuepedia.org/Issuepedia:Form.link.news) |
(fixed & updated) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | < | + | <hide> |
| − | + | {{page/link|article}} | |
| − | + | [[title/short::Girls gone guilty: Evolutionary psych on sex #2]] | |
| − | + | </hide> | |
| − | + | * '''when''': [[when posted::2008-07-18]] | |
| − | {{ | + | * '''author''': [[author::Greg Downey]] |
| − | + | * '''source''': [[site::blogs/Neuroanthropology]] | |
| + | * '''topics''': [[topic::human nature]] [[topic::gender inequity]] [[topic::mainstream media]] [[topic::interpretive framing]] [[topic::human sexuality]] [[topic::evolutionary psychology]] [[topic::women]] | ||
| + | * '''link''': [[URL::http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/07/18/girls-gone-guilty-evolutionary-psych-on-sex-2/]] | ||
| + | * '''title''': [[title::Girls gone guilty: Evolutionary psych on sex #2]] | ||
| + | * '''summary''': [[Summary::“That is, if you went in with a different [[interpretive framing|framework]] for explanation – like, "too many guys in one-night stands don't know how to satisfy women" or "women are better at sex than men" – you could construct another story around this data that was ... more plausible than 'women are programmed to want long-term relationship'...”]] | ||
| + | ==Excerpt== | ||
| + | <blockquote> | ||
| + | That is, if you went in with a different [[interpretive framing|framework]] for explanation – like, "too many guys in one-night stands don't know how to satisfy women" or "women are better at sex than men" – you could construct another story around this data that was equally plausible – no, ''more'' plausible – than 'women are programmed to want long-term relationship' (errrr... except for the majority 54% who had positive experiences and the fact that they didn't see casual sex as a prelude to long-term relationships. Again, can someone explain to me why the evolutionary-programmed fembots were doing one-night gigs at all as it is inherently against their programming?). | ||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
| + | {{page/link/footer}} | ||
Latest revision as of 15:12, 22 September 2020
- when: 2008-07-18
- author: Greg Downey
- source: blogs/Neuroanthropology
- topics: human nature gender inequity mainstream media interpretive framing human sexuality evolutionary psychology women
- link: http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/07/18/girls-gone-guilty-evolutionary-psych-on-sex-2/
- title: Girls gone guilty: Evolutionary psych on sex #2
- summary: “That is, if you went in with a different framework for explanation – like, "too many guys in one-night stands don't know how to satisfy women" or "women are better at sex than men" – you could construct another story around this data that was ... more plausible than 'women are programmed to want long-term relationship'...”
Excerpt
That is, if you went in with a different framework for explanation – like, "too many guys in one-night stands don't know how to satisfy women" or "women are better at sex than men" – you could construct another story around this data that was equally plausible – no, more plausible – than 'women are programmed to want long-term relationship' (errrr... except for the majority 54% who had positive experiences and the fact that they didn't see casual sex as a prelude to long-term relationships. Again, can someone explain to me why the evolutionary-programmed fembots were doing one-night gigs at all as it is inherently against their programming?).