News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century,... by joshuamorton on Friday June 12, 2020 @03:57PM (#23503154)
> Half of the reason for pushing for sexual restrictions and monogamy was because it stopped uprisings and stabilized relations.

Sort of. When you start with the preconception that men have the societal power (and that women must be monogomous/attached to only a single man), then yes monogomy has a purpose. It allows most men to have stable relationships. The alternative is classical polygamy (which might better be referred to as polygyny, or marriage where a man has multiple wives), women with many husbands are...rarer in history.

If you drop the restriction that women are attached only to a single man, a lot of the causes for unrest go away. And indeed at that point, there's actually no real hard-learned thing you're basing the restrictions on, because it's all predicated on women being attached to at most one man.

Re:Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century,... by inetknght on Friday June 12, 2020 @03:59PM (#23503172)
> If you drop the restriction that women are attached only to a single man, a lot of the causes for unrest go away.

Not if the attachments become grouped such that some have many connections and many have none.

Re:Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century,... by joshuamorton on Friday June 12, 2020 @04:08PM (#23503296)
Yes, but I don't think anyone has evidence that that's the case (and in fact most of the evidence supports the opposite: that in groups of people who openly have sex with multiple partners, everyone has sex with multiple partners).