Poly and Preferences
Jun. 12th, 2009 11:22 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Psychology Today (yeah, I know, but still) has a series of articles about polyamory today.
New Scientist has a report on a study showing that men actually prefer normal/average women.
Enjoy!
New Scientist has a report on a study showing that men actually prefer normal/average women.
Enjoy!
no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 03:49 pm (UTC)But the report doesn't say: what does "prefer" mean, or what did the study define it to mean? 'Find more appealing', okay, but: to look at (in terms of pure aesthetics)? To fantasize about taking to bed? Or to imagine *really* taking to bed? I don't think those are necessarily the same thing. I know they mightn't be for me.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 03:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 04:06 pm (UTC)And hey, while I'm communicating with you--I've been thinking about you repeatedly in the past 2-3 days and keep thinking "I should just pick up the phone and call," but I know you're busy-busy. So if you do get a few minutes and would like to have a chat, give me a buzz.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 04:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 04:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 05:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 04:20 pm (UTC)Edited: Ok, doesn't look too bad. However I like the "bad boy" article. Alex feels that the reason women want the bad boys is because they have different genes that could enhance survival (as opposed to the "good boys" who don't travel and thus have more static genes).
So the goal is to fuck the bad boys, get the unusual genes into your pool, then get the "good boys" to raise the kids.
Best of all worlds. Maybe this is where the jealousy thing came into play...
CZ
Interesting piece
Date: 2009-06-12 05:25 pm (UTC)Advice: Do Open Relationships Work?
Hara Estroff Marano advises a couple on the pros and cons of an open relationship.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/index.php?term=pto-4820.html
... which is very negative, mean in spots, and obviously hasn't read the literature or the first piece. Strange.
Re: Interesting piece
Date: 2009-06-12 05:46 pm (UTC)CZ
Re: Interesting piece
Date: 2009-06-12 05:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 05:29 pm (UTC)