FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

This scientist has proven swinging is morally wrong

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is he basing it all on the Roman Empire?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Is he basing it all on the Roman Empire? "

86 different societies

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

How long do we have?

shall i stock up on essentials just in case it gets nasty..?

will there be zombies..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I never did like sociology.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *KMaxMan
over a year ago

Bristol

Well if it was on the internet it must be true.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How long do we have?

shall i stock up on essentials just in case it gets nasty..?

will there be zombies.."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How long do we have?

shall i stock up on essentials just in case it gets nasty..?

will there be zombies..

"

Damn sausage fingers! That was meant to be

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *NACONDA1000Man
over a year ago

buncrana


"Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges? "

So what are YOU doing on here then????

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Well if it was on the internet it must be true."

The internet is full of mathematics, is that not true?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 04/03/18 20:49:31]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is he basing it all on the Roman Empire?

86 different societies "

So in the 6500 years that humans have established civilisations, 86 have gone corrupt cause of shagging! I think there maybe 1000's that haven't that he's missed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges?

So what are YOU doing on here then????"

Bringing enlightenment

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm guessing swingers make up less than 1% of society, so the 99% will keep us in check.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester

Is it generalisable? Is it replicable? Did the study identify its limitations and weaknesses, if so what were they? if it didn't then the study has lost massive credibility.

You have posted the name of the study, or a Link for it, so I'm asking here. Not that I'd bother to go read it if you did, but hey that's me

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emini ManMan
over a year ago

There and to the left a bit

Was it conducted by a religious think tank by any chance? And would be interesting to know which societies these studies were based on?

Either way it won't change my ways - we're a minority of society as a whole and even if these studies were true unlikely to have any overall effect. I also suspect there are just as scientific studies that prove there's no effect either way

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges?

So what are YOU doing on here then????

Bringing enlightenment "

yay..

thank fuck for that..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The ancient records of the Jews known as the OLd testament, their accounts of the nations around them brightly witness to this fact of decline in nations

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"Is it generalisable? Is it replicable? Did the study identify its limitations and weaknesses, if so what were they? if it didn't then the study has lost massive credibility.

You have posted the name of the study, or a Link for it, so I'm asking here. Not that I'd bother to go read it if you did, but hey that's me "

That's meant to be "you haven't", I know it's obvious but to some it wouldn't be.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Is it generalisable? Is it replicable? Did the study identify its limitations and weaknesses, if so what were they? if it didn't then the study has lost massive credibility.

You have posted the name of the study, or a Link for it, so I'm asking here. Not that I'd bother to go read it if you did, but hey that's me "

Can't post links, I'd message the article but like you say you won't read it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Who did the study?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges? "

Fuck it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Who did the study?"

J.d.unwin

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Science cannot prove love !

This scientist clearly has it wrong

Just watch any zoo program on TV and watch the animals fuck each other ! Very few are monogamous !

Most monkeys are swingers , literally and sexually

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Jesus was a swinger

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittleAcornMan
over a year ago

visiting the beach

Societies come and go.

This one is over due a change.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"Who did the study?"

I'm guessing the surname is unwin

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *KMaxMan
over a year ago

Bristol


"Well if it was on the internet it must be true.

The internet is full of mathematics, is that not true?"

Some of it is yes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entralscotscpl7Couple
over a year ago

Falkirk

Bullshit. You can post links.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emini ManMan
over a year ago

There and to the left a bit


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin "

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Bullshit. You can post links."

Can I? Didn't realise

https://www.tremr.com/Duck-Rabbit/sexually-permissive-societies-always-fall-anthropologist-says

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges? "
I choose selfish

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!! "

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester

So the OP hasn't actually read the book, he's read the write up from someone else. Did you realise his book was published in 1934, the study was a research in to previous societies: Romans, Anglo Saxons, Greeks etc... I really don't think his research would be applied in the same manner today.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I’ve thought long and hard before writing this reply to the OPs statement but honestly believe that whats he’s written is.......Bollocks !!! xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"So the OP hasn't actually read the book, he's read the write up from someone else. Did you realise his book was published in 1934, the study was a research in to previous societies: Romans, Anglo Saxons, Greeks etc... I really don't think his research would be applied in the same manner today. "

Everyone's so defensive!

I said I read the article, mostly the headline, jeez

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emini ManMan
over a year ago

There and to the left a bit


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

"

Oh I have no doubt I'll be one of the first against the wall

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'll take my chances ...

Going to Vahala

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

"

Blame for what?

is it correct that the study is from before 1936 that you are referring to?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

Blame for what?

is it correct that the study is from before 1936 that you are referring to?"

What's the date got to do with anything?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Anthropology is a very soft science but the research is interesting to read.

If you look into some of the early research and the people who conducted it you would know to be a bit sceptical of the conclusions they make from their observations.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"So the OP hasn't actually read the book, he's read the write up from someone else. Did you realise his book was published in 1934, the study was a research in to previous societies: Romans, Anglo Saxons, Greeks etc... I really don't think his research would be applied in the same manner today.

Everyone's so defensive!

I said I read the article, mostly the headline, jeez"

Not defensive at all. Just a thread I'm slightly interested in, or was, as it was based around research. But upon reading it I find out its historical research to which I have no interest in. I was merely posting the facts you missed out

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

Blame for what?

is it correct that the study is from before 1936 that you are referring to?

What's the date got to do with anything? "

A lot

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"So the OP hasn't actually read the book, he's read the write up from someone else. Did you realise his book was published in 1934, the study was a research in to previous societies: Romans, Anglo Saxons, Greeks etc... I really don't think his research would be applied in the same manner today.

Everyone's so defensive!

I said I read the article, mostly the headline, jeez

Not defensive at all. Just a thread I'm slightly interested in, or was, as it was based around research. But upon reading it I find out its historical research to which I have no interest in. I was merely posting the facts you missed out "

But history happened

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well we are just selfish then.. #awaitingthethunderbolttostrikeus

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

Blame for what?

is it correct that the study is from before 1936 that you are referring to?

What's the date got to do with anything? "

relevance springs to mind for a start..

your talking about a time when it was ok for men to knock their wives about, society has moved on somewhat thankfully ..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

One paper by one author does not a proof make.

Do you even science?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"Well we are just selfish then.. #awaitingthethunderbolttostrikeus "

#bantz

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"One paper by one author does not a proof make.

Do you even science?"

No, I don't even science, it's a historical observation! Do you even history?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"One paper by one author does not a proof make.

Do you even science?

No, I don't even science, it's a historical observation! Do you even history?"

You said it was scientific evidence

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"One paper by one author does not a proof make.

Do you even science?

No, I don't even science, it's a historical observation! Do you even history?

You said it was scientific evidence "

I wouldn't listen to what I say

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LIRTWITHUSCouple
over a year ago

Chester

Fuck science

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

I'm prepared to risk it.

Will there still be coffee?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"One paper by one author does not a proof make.

Do you even science?

No, I don't even science, it's a historical observation! Do you even history?"

I know that sociology is possibly one of the "lesser" of the sciences, but it still is one, apparently.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"One paper by one author does not a proof make.

Do you even science?

No, I don't even science, it's a historical observation! Do you even history?

I know that sociology is possibly one of the "lesser" of the sciences, but it still is one, apparently. "

It's more of a hobby I think, like stamp collecting

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When we're these societies and how did the not being monogamous bring them down?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"When we're these societies and how did the not being monogamous bring them down?

"

I've posted a link

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Who did the study?

J.d.unwin

So this study is from sometime before 1936 (which is when he died) at a time when society was not as permissive of sexuality as it is now? I therefore give it as much credence as I would talk of men from Mars landing in my garden tomorrow morning!!

I'll add you to the list of people to blame

Blame for what?

is it correct that the study is from before 1936 that you are referring to?

What's the date got to do with anything?

relevance springs to mind for a start..

your talking about a time when it was ok for men to knock their wives about, society has moved on somewhat thankfully ..

"

In Christian lands it was never acceptable for men to knock their wives about...

"Husbands love your wives and be servants to both them and your children...Teaching of Apostle Paul....

......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"When we're these societies and how did the not being monogamous bring them down?

"

Or was non monogamy a result of general decline rather than its cause. Or, may the words wither on my lips, is it just people with a moral agenda saying its the cause of the decline of civilizations a bit like that guy who said floods were the fault of homosexuals.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" I'm guessing swingers make up less than 1% of society, so the 99% will keep us in check."

But they're all shagging around too!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arlo82Couple
over a year ago

the gym and random places

To be fair before the Christian crusades monogamy didn't really exist. Mormons manage poly relationships as do many other cultures. I fail to see the link between fuckin one person your whole life or society collapsing?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arlo82Couple
over a year ago

the gym and random places


" I'm guessing swingers make up less than 1% of society, so the 99% will keep us in check.

But they're all shagging around too! "

And they hurt people while doing so! Not like us

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't take anything a scientist proves to be right or wrong as fact.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *innie The MinxWoman
over a year ago

Under the Duvet

I'm happy to be morally wrong.

Can someone make me a badge?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Firstly, I'd need to read the full theory and evidence, published in a credible scientific journal, before perceiving that I've got an understanding of the proposition.

Secondly, whilst science may propose theories and provide evidence, it doesn't really 'prove' such concepts as you've covered op.

Humans, including other hominids that we've inter-bred with, have undergone hundreds of thousands of years where our behaviour and societal norms have varied. The interbreeding between homo sapiens and Neanderthals is very recent and Cro-Magnon humans are amongst species that likely interbred with others. We don't have incredible detailed records of the last 200,000 or 300,000 years, during which these changes occurred and yet during this fairly short period of evolution we have undergone incredible development in many years. The development of agriculture, say up to 10,000 years ago, by many human cultures, helped to stabilise how people lived: they were better suited to staying put and manging their crops and animals, for example. We know this sort of detail but less about whether people were monogamous or played the field etc. Marriage is probably a very recent invention, I think, so it's feasible that much of the incredible growth of the human species has been whilst we've perhaps not been that monogamous.

Whilst cultures come and go and you may see correlation between some parts of their cultural norms, I'm guessing that these are largely correlations, rather than more concrete causative reasons.

But, I've not seen this so called evidence and research and just read the opening post.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To be fair before the Christian crusades monogamy didn't really exist. Mormons manage poly relationships as do many other cultures. I fail to see the link between fuckin one person your whole life or society collapsing?

"

Monogamy prevailed were ever Christianity prevailed long before the crusades, the mormons today follow this practice also...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I've found a correlation between publishing such stuff and death. This J D Unwin died 2 years after this book was published recently in 1934 :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._D._Unwin

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 04/03/18 22:02:08]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I’ve not read the whole thread but things only appear to be morally wrong when they break our own personal moral code.

Look in here for example - bareback sex? Many are outraged at how morally wrong it is.

Cheaters? Burn the witches!

But having casual sex with every Tom, Dick & Harry that takes my fancy? Ah that’s fine!

Watersports and drinking each other’s piss? Ah y’know I quite like that (*actually I don’t, I’m just using it as an example! ) so that’s morally acceptable too despite probably the majority of society being sickened by the thought!

We always think OUR morals are right and anyone who does things that we can’t understand or don’t like (even without understanding that other person’s perspective) are the ones who are morally wrong!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

It's not recent info, it's stuff a guy wrote well before the 2nd world war.

It's all just correlation too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

I haven't seen the research and without extensive research and robust evidence it's just opinion.

Even if I believe every word that you have written it still suggests to me that it isn't having multiple partners that destroys a society but society's attitude to having more than one partner and using monogamy as the bench mark. It's the tutters and finger pointers that'd deny you.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" I'm guessing swingers make up less than 1% of society, so the 99% will keep us in check."
.

Boom... We're not in a swinging society and I don't believe ever will be.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodnitegirlWoman
over a year ago

Yorkshire

The scientist can just F**K OFF

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodnitegirlWoman
over a year ago

Yorkshire


"I'm happy to be morally wrong.

Can someone make me a badge? "

God bless you. Badge us all up

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Junk 'science' for those deranged enough to believe in it.

Now if you had gone with breakdown of family unit, destruction of community, or financial inequality....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otSoNewWalesCoupleCouple
over a year ago

South Wales


"Okay, I've read an objectively true article, the science is in and it's undeniable. It explains how sexually permissive societies always fail ... here's and excerpt

"...among the 86 different societies he studied, he not only found monogamy to be correlated with a society's strength, but came to the sobering conclusion that

"In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence."

In other words, once a society loosened its sexual mores and abandoned monogamy, it began to degenerate and would eventually dissipate away. So much for 'permissive' sexual attitudes being "progressive"; the complete opposite of the sexual regression described by Unwin in his research on his study of a society's regression."

My question to you is, now you've seen the evidence will you stop your dengerate ways and save our society? Or will you be selfish and crash 500 years of progress to satisfy your urges? "

I'm guessing the scientist is on Fab and pissed because he's not getting any meets.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm guessing the scientist was the odd man out...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lkDomWhtSubBiCpleCouple
over a year ago

Somewhere / Everywhere /Kinksville

Are you here to save us from ourselves OP

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodnitegirlWoman
over a year ago

Yorkshire

He was probably a single male who got no replies and got mocked for posting a ‘why no meets’ thread on day 12 before going UNLOS

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't need a scientist to tell me we are heading for mighty fall.We now live in a throw away society where everything is disposable.From mobile phones to relationships.An age of instant gratification,ignorance and selfishness etc etc...............

A scene from Titanic....

(Lookout)..... "Captain there's an iceberg straight ahead"

(Captain)......"No there isn't"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is it generalisable? Is it replicable? Did the study identify its limitations and weaknesses, if so what were they? if it didn't then the study has lost massive credibility.

You have posted the name of the study, or a Link for it, so I'm asking here. Not that I'd bother to go read it if you did, but hey that's me "

I'd also like to know about his methods and how he established causation in his study, as there are lots of factors that can cause societies to fail. Did he do a randomised controlled trial and control for all possible other reasons a society might fail?

And where are the references?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"Is it generalisable? Is it replicable? Did the study identify its limitations and weaknesses, if so what were they? if it didn't then the study has lost massive credibility.

You have posted the name of the study, or a Link for it, so I'm asking here. Not that I'd bother to go read it if you did, but hey that's me

I'd also like to know about his methods and how he established causation in his study, as there are lots of factors that can cause societies to fail. Did he do a randomised controlled trial and control for all possible other reasons a society might fail?

And where are the references?"

It's a book from the early 1930's, so not news or something to take seriously, as you have already guessed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Societies come and go.

This one is over due a change."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Tbh sexual behaviours that were labelled as 'reckless' or 'immoral', have always existed in every civilisation known on earth, past, present and future.

I personally think that a scientist who posits that the decline of any past societies is only due to sexual behaviours that did not fit the norms can be taken seriously.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There's about 22000 people online right now out of say 65milluin people in the UK?

Out of those 22000, if the forums are to be listened to, 20000 are single men of which 19995 are married and cheating.

Of the remaining 2000, 997 are fake profiles.

This leaves approximately 1003 people who are swingers complaining about fakes and time wasters.

I'm not sure society is in danger

Legal notice: these facts are a rough guide. If you are a fake profile no offence was intended.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I haven't seen the research and without extensive research and robust evidence it's just opinion.

Even if I believe every word that you have written it still suggests to me that it isn't having multiple partners that destroys a society but society's attitude to having more than one partner and using monogamy as the bench mark. It's the tutters and finger pointers that'd deny you. "

I don't remember reading this thread. Or writing this post but I was just about to write much the same again

So I've bumped me up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top