Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

17466Re: [evol-psych] 2 questions from a class

Expand Messages
  • Elizabeth A. Socolow
    Mar 1, 2002
      In response to this posting by Graeme Deeth, I wonder if we cannot watch our
      way of speaking to each other.

      The phrase below FEMALE FAIRY TALE is hideously sarcastic, mocking, and
      scornful. Many studies have been done on women who are very matter of fact
      about sex, such as Iris Murdoch, and, contrarywise, on what the sense of
      loyalty and love does to preserve social forms, ongoingness, family
      cohesion, trust and pleasure. On both sides--women who have no other
      coordinates to sexual passion and experiment, and women who do, the comment
      was unnecessary and cast into doubt ALL of the other analysis.

      >From: "Graeme Deeth" <marshalldeeth@...>
      >To: <evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com>, "Joseph A. Buckhalt"
      <buckhja@...>, "Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair" <leiedoke@...>
      >Subject: Re: [evol-psych] 2 questions from a class
      >Date: Fri, Mar 1, 2002, 2:06 AM

      >Leif Edward
      >If I may add a couple of thoughts re homosexuality. I recall a paper
      >examining sexual fantasy, (Sexual Fantasy: Harold Leitenberg & Kris Henning,
      >1995; Psych Bulletin 17 (1) 469-496 {interesting pages numbers!}) in which
      >so-called homosexuals and heterosexuals (if such a distinction exists in
      >reality) described in detail their sexual fantasies. When analysed, the top
      >several fantasies were shared by those who would identify as homo or hetero.
      >The usual suspects headed the list; sex with someone other than the primary
      >partner, sex with multiple partners, and surprise-surpirse - sex with the
      >opposite sex for those claiming homo status, and sex with the same sex for
      >those claiming hetero status. Males and females differed little as I
      >recall, except on the usual emotional attachment and female fairytale
      >Sounds a lot like Freud's polymorphous perversity - unconstrained by social
      >taboos, we will try it on with whomever we can obtain. My experience
      >clinically supports this cynical view. If one takes the trouble to explore
      >reasons for sexual choices in depth, there is often an element of "I'd have
      >sex with the opposite sex if I was game, but because the risk of rejection
      >is high, I'll settle for the easier option - my own sex" Such a response
      >need not be related to realistic assessment of mate value, only the
      >perception of inferiority would be required.
      >Finally, it is worth noting just how common homosexual behaviour is in the
      >non-human world. This is merely part of the sexual behaviour repertoire,
      >not the entire agmut of an individual's lifetime sexual experience. For a
      >viewpoint from another discipline, Marjorie Garber's Vice Versa illuminates
      >the blinkers through which bisexuality is viewed in Western cultures.
      >Animals of course don't have well developed social, and religious taboos
      >prohibiting that which feels so good - just do it!
      >Graeme Deeth
      >ps: when will we begin to value in-depth qualitative research on a par with
      >quantitative versions. The former allows people to be (more) truthful about
      >taboo topics (read sexuality in any puritanical culture).
    • Show all 21 messages in this topic