Support NeoGAF

[Matlock]

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/050128_monkey_business.html

I guess they're not smart enough to find DPPH, or at least Bittorrent...the poor little guys.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I think you missed the other exciting news.

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/050124_sex_school.html



A study of sexual and romantic relations at a high school found students connected by long chains, rather than in a tight network with a core group of a promiscuous few.

 

[ToxicAdam]

That second link is sweet.


I liked this part...

The research reveals a semantically complex rule that seems to guide adolescent sexual conduct. Here goes: A girl is loath to date her old boyfriend's new girlfriend's old boyfriend

I gave this hypothetical to my wife .. and she scrunched up her nose and said "No, I would never do this!". She really couldn't give a reason why.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Yeah, that was the part I liked as well. And it made my brain hurt for a second to think how that worked. It sounded like a bad rumor.

But, it makes perfect sense you have to think about it

A girl is loath to date her old boyfriend's new girlfriend's old boyfriend

g1 = girl available: this is the girl that is looking for a new boyfriend

b1 = this is the ex-boyfriend of g1.

g2 =this is the current girlfriend of b1 and ex-girlfriend of b2.

b2 = boy available: this is the boy that is available.

Now then let make some simple hypothisis

g1 thinks that she is better than g2 hence g1 > g2

if that is true then g1 thinks her decisions are better than g2 therefore anything g2 likes has less value than what g1 likes.

Following that g1 thinks that b1 is better than b2 because she picked him first if not then she would have picked b2.

Now then if you think about it b1 is the alpha male becasue he can command the attention of two women.

b2 is the lowest on the social chain becasue g2 doesn't want him and g1 wouldn't bother with anything g2 wouldn't want becasue g1 is "better than" g2. Women's prime motivator is finding a mate that can provide for her. If b2 couldn't provide for g2 then what good would he do for g1?


Now then the reverse doesn't apply for men because as we saw in the Monkey study a male will pay to look at any woman's ass.

 

[FoneBone]

I think you missed the other exciting news.

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/050124_sex_school.html



A study of sexual and romantic relations at a high school found students connected by long chains, rather than in a tight network with a core group of a promiscuous few.

There was a whole thread about this on the SA forums... I mean, it's fascinating stuff, but I'd like to know more about the researchers' methods. For one thing, the number of homosexual relationships on there is suspiciously low.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

There was a whole thread about this on the SA forums... I mean, it's fascinating stuff, but I'd like to know more about the researchers' methods. For one thing, the number of homosexual relationships on there is suspiciously low.

They probably focused on hetrosexual relationships. I would think it would be difficult (finding canidates wouldn't be easy) and controversal to attempt to study the sexual pattens of homosexual relationships in high school.

 

[Mario_Hugo]

"The rhesus macaque monkeys also splurged on photos of top-dog counterparts, the high-ranking primates."

 

[Suerte]

 

[ToxicAdam]

Yeah, that was the part I liked as well. And it made my brain hurt for a second to think how that worked. It sounded like a bad rumor.

But, it makes perfect sense you have to think about it



g1 = girl available: this is the girl that is looking for a new boyfriend

b1 = this is the ex-boyfriend of g1.

g2 =this is the current girlfriend of b1 and ex-girlfriend of b2.

b2 = boy available: this is the boy that is available.

Now then let make some simple hypothisis

g1 thinks that she is better than g2 hence g1 > g2

if that is true then g1 thinks her decisions are better than g2 therefore anything g2 likes has less value than what g1 likes.

Following that g1 thinks that b1 is better than b2 because she picked him first if not then she would have picked b2.

Now then if you think about it b1 is the alpha male becasue he can command the attention of two women.

b2 is the lowest on the social chain becasue g2 doesn't want him and g1 wouldn't bother with anything g2 wouldn't want becasue g1 is "better than" g2. Women's prime motivator is finding a mate that can provide for her. If b2 couldn't provide for g2 then what good would he do for g1?


Now then the reverse doesn't apply for men because as we saw in the Monkey study a male will pay to look at any woman's ass.

That's a great way to lay it out .. and it makes sense. But I think alot of that type of thinking is almost done at a subconcious level.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

That's a great way to lay it out .. and it makes sense. But I think alot of that type of thinking is almost done at a subconcious level.

Oh totally, I mean looking at it from where we are it's simple but there are a lot of subconcious factor that take place that is totally transparent to the people involved. I don't the g1 is even aware of this line of thinking at all. It just comes out more like "I would never date Josh."