Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellybean
As regards my boyfriend being faithful, I suppose I was probably operating on the тАЬdonтАЩt ask, donтАЩt tellтАЭ principle. I believed what I did not know would not hurt me, but I had no reason to think he wasnтАЩt being faithful. However, I think most people would draw the line at finding their boyfriend in flagrante delicto with another guy
Did you catch him with the other guy in Pattaya//Bkk or in issan
In my experience Thai boys rarely "shit on their own doorstep" so i presume it was outside Issan
(or was it with a girl)
Like Matt I was 28 when i first met my BF... he was 18 at the time... 8.5 years we are still together... only get to sepnd 3-4 months of each year tigtehr - but try to make the best of that time.... and both of us are definately still predators... with no sign or monogamy... except on birthdays!
Re: The morally illiterate
Quote:
Originally Posted by meeja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles
Quote:
Originally Posted by meeja
" ... When else in history have we had revolutions in so many countries at the one time? ... "
1848.
Like this is the 21st century. Who cares about ancient history?
You said/asked "When else in history ... ".
Now you might guess why Once in a While thinks you're st*p*d. ( *'s for Beachlover )
Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles
( *'s for Beachlover )
Smiley, are you insinuating that beachbore is an **shole? I'm sure your not, but if you were, I'm sure you wouldn't be the first!! LOL
Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Quote:
Did you catch him with the other guy in Pattaya//Bkk or in issan
In my experience Thai boys rarely "shit on their own doorstep" so i presume it was outside Issan
(or was it with a girl)
Like Matt I was 28 when i first met my BF... he was 18 at the time... 8.5 years we are still together... only get to sepnd 3-4 months of each year tigtehr - but try to make the best of that time.... and both of us are definately still predators... with no sign or monogamy... except on birthdays!
colmx in reply to your question above, I caught them together in my apartment in Bangkok and the other person was another Thai guy.
I am glad to hear your relationship is still going strong after 8┬╜ years тАУ you are obviously doing something right, I wish you both well.
Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by meeja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Once In Awhile
More importantly - how stupid are you?
Why are you dissing me?
I don't know if you're serious or just taking the piss out of the grumpy "intellects"... but I think it's good either way LOL.
Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Thor69 Wrote:
Quote:
Monogamy and fidelity have two different meanings. Monogamous doesn't mean sexual exclusivity. It means you value that relationship above all others. Fidelity with someone means sexual exclusivity.
Finally, in 8 pages of swash-buckling banter ...an intelligent remark.
TyeDyed...you are living proof that computer keyboards make men out of mice. You're opening comments to CDMatt on this post reveal your idenity as a real "Keyboard Zorro". Can you recommend an effective cleaning fluid for removing venom from a keyboard?
Personally, I value my relationship with him above all others, and I think it's fair to say that he feels the same way, so the term "monogomous" seems to categorize our relationship pretty well.
Thep told me once that he thought I loved my guitar more than him. My response was..." I love you both the same". He wasn't too pleased with that response, so the topic of fidelity is now avoided.
Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodger
Thep told me once that he thought I loved my guitar more than him. My response was..." I love you both the same". He wasn't too pleased with that response, so the topic of fidelity is now avoided.
Nice one Dodger: All in all it's not so much as to what you say as to what you do. You have proved your love for Thep by the way you are now standing by him in his time of great need. Well done.
Re: Who here is truly monogamous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 69Thor
Monogamous doesn't mean sexual exclusivity. It means you value that relationship above all others. Fidelity with someone means sexual exclusivity.
Nonsense. Vice versa.
http://www.janthor.com/images/on/melankolicHarem.jpeg
Melancholy in the Harem. Sad to hear that you don't understand males. At least you do understand females!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnmatt
Many seem to want a partner, but only as long as they can have friends with benefits on the side. I've never quite understood that, as in my mind, it diminishes the entire relationship, and the entire reason of being together.
"In 2000, Dr. Rice published his findings showing that when flies in normally promiscuous habitats were experimentally forced to be monogamous, the evolution of the seminal fluids proteins ultimately promoted the extension of mate survival time, rather than the reduction of it, relative to the promiscuous controls. In addition to this observation, Dr. Rice noted that monogamous males who were placed back into a promiscuous environment displayed an overall reduction of fitness. These data are of particular interest because they show a correlation between the rate of mutation of sexually antagonistic traits, and the degree of commitment between an individual and its mate. This rate is important because of the elevated evolutionary rate of reproduction-associated proteins. A 2002 article in Science indicates that the divergence of these proteins is especially noticeable in the primate lineage leading to humans, mice and rats, marine invertebrates, and D. melanogaster. The observed relationship shown here, in the reproductive proteins of humans and D. melanogaster, gives credibility to the idea that we can learn about our own evolutionary past by observing the rapidly multiplying fruit flies (~1 generation per 2 weeks).
Because sexual antagonism acts as an evolutionary catalyst, at least in terms of these reproductive proteins, it is quite possible that this mechanism is likely to influence the initiation of other evolutionary landmarks, like speciation, Dr. Rice said in a 1997 sociobiological publication. Speciation is the creation of so much genetic divergence that isolated members of what was once one species will become reproductively incompatible. Over time, they will become separate species. Because inter-sexual conflict is so intimately involved with the genetics of the reproductive biochemistry, anatomy, physiology, and behavior, its role as a catalyst for these changes certainly makes it seem like a vitally important factor in the speciation process.
Monandrous (monogamous) groups of female flies were tested against polyandrous (promiscuous females, having high inter-sexual conflict) groups with respect to speciation-causing factors. Another of Dr. Rice's observations, published in 2000, was that speciation occurred four times faster in the polyandrous groups, once again supporting the notion that gender conflict is what Dr. Rice calls an "engine of speciation."
http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume7/issu ... pbell.html