?1;2c
On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 QueeneMUSE@aol.com wrote:
> Is that really making it more interesting, or just more of a hunt. I
> hear that men enjoy the hunt more than the act, but this takes the cake!!
> PS
Well, personally speaking, I'm pretty sure I enjoy the act(s) more
than the hunt. The hunt seems pretty much like a waste of time.
Much better would be an encapsulated exchange of information that
determine whether or not mutually acceptable criteria and interests
are satisfied.
> As a monogamous female, not prone to bragging "I got laid last night", the
> idea of going on 10,000 dates with 10,000 lawers, engineers, architects,
> doctors, bodybuilders or whatever, and listening to 10, 000 evenings of
> conversation about them, with their sole intent being finding one right sex
> partner - my hair stands on end.
I think your comment proves my point. Now we accept this process
as part of being "human". Since it is "moderately" successful for
some subset of the population it survives as a common human activity.
If on the other hand the costs were *much* higher to achieve the "goal",
we would expend the energy required to make it much more efficient.
Social and biological scientists would presumably expend much more
energy exploring compatibility criteria and we would presumably get
a refined process rather than the hit-or-miss situation we seem to
currently have.
The once-in-a-blue moon physical compatibility issue would make it
much simpler, our embeded watch-agents would inform us that only
on February 28, 2117 would our physical equipment be in sync sufficiently
to allow mating. In the meantime, we could relax and simply get to
know each other and find out what we might have to offer (other than
sex) that would be of mutual interest.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:39 MDT