3

votes

Has going paleo made you leave behind any societal norms regarding sexuality?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created March 15, 2011 at 6:35 AM

I'm mainly referring to experimenting with the same sex, but curious about other norms. I find it highly likely that many of our ancestors had same-sex relations, especially since it's so common among other primates.

03db20f160e58814827ae5a05a5c8792

(520)

on March 19, 2011
at 10:16 AM

Melissa, your statement is wrong. There is not one "anthropology", but different fields and different methodologies. The same goes for psychology or biology. And Psychoanalysis is taken seriously by some anthropologists and psychologists. I read a new textbook about brain science /neuroscience and the author stated that brain imaging confirmed Freuds assumptions about subconscious conflicts and how therapy can resolve them. This guy takes Freud seriously. :-) Of course, modern science also debunked some myths in psychoanalysis about development of children (cf. Daniel Stern).

03db20f160e58814827ae5a05a5c8792

(520)

on March 16, 2011
at 08:51 AM

Yes, homosexuality as an identity concept is an invention of the 19th century. French philosopher Michel Foucault decribed the process of discoursive construction of "Sexual identity" in his books.

6a4fd73b4ae4761eefec8e0d38e6f224

(1008)

on March 15, 2011
at 09:30 PM

I've heard a similar complaint about women, but in a generational context. Within the past year I've been approached by a number of men in their 20s - between 6 and 12 years younger than me (I'm 35). When I about the age difference - which they're aware of, either because I tell them or they've reached out to me on a dating site - they say their female GenY counterparts are not commitment-minded and too self-absorbed. So they go for older women. Which is perfectly fine by me! (Though I would like to start a family, so I continue to fish in my own generational waters.)

2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 09:09 PM

Oh I know the type. It's definitely not exclusive to America though, we have plenty of self and looks obsessed ladies here in England too. Interestingly it seems to be in the main cities like London, unfortunatley it is spreading my way to Kent too.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:39 PM

btw, I originally tried to type this out on my cellphone and think I accidentally clicked the report button on Melissa's comment. I didnt mean to do that. I respect Melissa and her opinions.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:38 PM

Seeing as that population group has different DNA then the rest of the 7 billion humans on earth I would see them as an exception. "Melanesians, together with Papuan people, are the only known modern humans whose prehistoric ancestors interbred with the Denisova hominin, sharing 4%–6% of their genome with this ancient human species.[7]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanesians The ju/wasi are one of the oldest and purest branches of homo sapiens (no Neanderthal blood either).

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:35 PM

agree that I have found some great women in the South. Some of the most toxic women Ive ever met were from Los Angeles. Im sure the women of Paleohacks are the exception and are great girls/women...maybe someone should make a Paleo dating site and get everyone together :-)

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:33 PM

AccordIng to them American women are too focused on themselves and not enough on family and education. My friends have married or are in a long term relationship with women from Latin America, Europe and Asia. Most of them have found the exception to this are women from the Southern States. These are all men from Bay Area, LA and NYC. I have only one friend who married an American and she was Jewish (so minority) and he converted to her religion. Once again her respected her focus on family and education not "the world revolves around me" mentality. Ive agree w/ my buddies somewhat & also

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:28 PM

AccordIng to them American women are too focused on themselves and not enough on family and education. My friends have married or are in a long term relationship with women from Latin America, Europe and Asia. Most of them have found the exception to this are women from the Southern States. These are all men from Bay Area, LA and NYC. I have only one friend who married an American and she was Jewish (so minority) and he converted to her religion. Once again her respected her focus on family and education not "the world revolves around me mentality."

2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:04 PM

@geoff Why won't your friends date american women? I don't know any so you'll have to "paint a picture" for me

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:52 PM

Seeing as that population group has different DNA then the rest of the 7 billion humans on earth I would see them as an exception. The ju/wasi are one of the oldest and purest branches of homo sapiens (no Neanderthal blood either). "Melanesians, together with Papuan people, are the only known modern humans whose prehistoric ancestors interbred with the Denisova hominin, sharing 4%–6% of their genome with this ancient human species.[7]"

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:39 PM

Kailen - I agree with you that polygamy/polyamory is not necessarily cheating. What I meant was I was angry with using a blanket statement rather than stating a personal belief. I also believe in full disclosure - if you are polyamorous/polygamous then be upfront about it. I obviously have a bias - having been cheated on in the past and the excuse being 'it's just the way i'm wired'. I apologize if my delivery of what i was trying to say was misinterpreted.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:31 PM

Melissa, why did you edit out my cited source and link? It's the only source provided so far in his discussion and you took it out.

0f4c4cda883cc6a16e6f264a12f97b6e

(0)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:53 PM

I'm not sure how you meant it, but I'd just like to point out that polygamy/polyamory does not necessarily imply cheating, at least in humans. I'm sure some people use it as a (very poor) excuse for engaging in non-monogamous behaviour, but not everyone considers having multiple partners to be cheating.

E5d59ab6d79320caf1e991cdc7971326

(801)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:47 PM

wow i need to meet some girls like you guys. i live somewhere that is largely dominated by moral veganism and the moral vegans don't seem to dig assertiveness or anything even remotely related... haha

84666a86108dee8d11cbbc85b6382083

(2399)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:47 PM

Gay cowboys, gay hunter-gatherers. The world's gone MAD !

84666a86108dee8d11cbbc85b6382083

(2399)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:46 PM

gay Cowboy, gay hunter-gatherers. The world's gone MAD !

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:22 PM

I agree; however, upon more research, it seems that the scientific community is split as to whether 'paleolithic' humans were monogamous or polygamous. I guess what makes me mad is an 'excuse' for cheating based on a paleolithic arguement. We aren't homo erectus anymore ;)

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 06:22 PM

None of these Freudian ideas are taken seriously in modern psych, biology, or anthropology. They are nonsense.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 06:07 PM

what's optimal for the species isn't always optimal for the individual. I am definitely for monogamy personally, but being realistic about our proclivities as a species helps me understand more about relationships.

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:05 PM

I love a manly man! My hubby is a true manly man! Big, burly, hairly, strong and loud! I know he will make an excellent long-term partner, because along with his alpha male traits, there are some 'soft' traits that I get to see in our private life.

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 05:39 PM

I love a manly man! My hubby is a true manly man! Big, burly, hairly, strong and loud! I know he will make an excellent long-term partner, because along with his alpha male traits, there are some 'soft' traits that I get to see in our private life. The statement "monogamy is a societal concept imposed on us" makes me angry. I don't think that monogamy is pushed on anyone - if you don't want a long-term relationship don't have one - but don't cop out with a statement like that. Some men - real alpha males - are willing and able to carry out monogamous relationships. Some aren't.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 04:38 PM

That's interesting. All of my American friends refuse to date American women. Guess there's a disconnect there

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 03:53 PM

but does this have anything to do with your diet?

05a1cb4b0c28558c2be2b7ac81b9467a

(106)

on March 15, 2011
at 03:13 PM

I've been comfortably bisexual for a while now :) It's just interesting to me.

84666a86108dee8d11cbbc85b6382083

(2399)

on March 15, 2011
at 02:53 PM

Just pointing out that hobbies (cars, tools, hunting) don't really correlate with psychological aspects (emotional needs, "soft").

7e1064164e012a1ead098098245b1cd4

(1197)

on March 15, 2011
at 02:15 PM

Very well said!

9e7039b63b656582f66d84c5255b436d

(1132)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:49 PM

http://evolvify.com/why-your-girlfriend-wants-to-cheat-on-you/ Of course all girls are attracted to alpha male, it doesn't bode well for monogamy; monogamy is a societal concept imposed on us.

Aead76beb5fc7b762a6b4ddc234f6051

(15239)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:29 PM

ive always said that if you can find a NICE GUY but WITH A SPINE, marry him fast. i did- my husband is a compassionate, sweet, doting father who is a self-identified feminist who loves his mother, but he is all alpha male, unafraid of emotional intimacy, confident, physically strong, bearded rugby-playing ass-kicking machine. its the best. i cant STAND needy men.

2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:20 PM

Give me an alpha male type ANYDAY. can't stand the needy, weak type, such a turn off. I've always had that preference though.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 01:04 PM

Haven't you read about the semen-ingesting rituals of the Melanesians?

24fcc21452ebe39c032be6801d6bbadd

(9812)

on March 15, 2011
at 12:59 PM

Hey that's my kinda man too! It does make sense to me from an evolutionary perspective- I would think that it would be better for the species if the strong, capable members are the ones doing most of the breeding. Either way, don't feel bad about having a "type;" I know some gals that prefer the Softies, there's plenty of love to go around!

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 10:52 AM

and also reproduction of the species to avoid extinction - however survival must necessarily come first in the grand scheme of things

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 10:48 AM

which just goes to show how pre-occupied I am with food/diet Oliver

9e7039b63b656582f66d84c5255b436d

(1132)

on March 15, 2011
at 10:25 AM

i don't think the original question is really referring to the diet side of the "paleo" lifestyle.

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 09:32 AM

leaving aside the aphrodisiac quality of some foodstuffs, I cannot see how ones inclinations can be attributed to diet

Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

14 Answers

best answer

12
9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 06:21 PM

  • Hunter-gatherers practice homosexual behavior (mostly male-male). It's been studied in many instances, particularly in Melanesia. However, they do not have a homosexual identity in their cultures that we know of and few are exclusively homosexual. There are no "gay" hunter-gatherers, such an identity is a modern thing. Same for the great apes.

  • No hunter-gatherer cultures practice life-long monogamy. The only monogamous great ape is the gibbon. And remember than monogamy in biology means stable pair-bonds, gibbons still have extra-pair sexual relations.

  • There is substantial evidence for a biological origin for modern human homosexuality. WAPF's journal made Lierre Keith very angry some years ago when they suggested it might be caused by malnutrition in the womb. There isn't any evidence for that so far, but many of the theories like the "sister hypothesis"(the idea that sisters of male homosexuals are more fertile) have failed in further study so it's a big question why something so obviously maladaptive would exist naturally in our species.

  • These statements make a lot of people angry. I don't know why. What species and other cultures do doesn't always speak to what is best for individuals. I enjoyed Sex At Dawn and I consider myself monogamous. It's like the people that are furious with the idea that hunter-gatherer cultures might be violent! It's good to be realistic about our proclivities as part of the human species. It allows you to analyze your own behavior and desires. And it helps make decisions that are best for you. Just because something is in our heritage or is modern doesn't make it good or bad.

  • But you also have to remember that living hunter-gatherers are not our ancestors and neither are the living apes. Humans are quite unique in many ways and one of them is our culture-based flexibility.

  • It's also worth noting that it's possible evolution in this area is happening NOW. The socioeconomic outcome for children born outside of pairs is very poor in most cultures. Furthermore, notice very few of the men using evolution as an excuse to sleep with every woman they can get their hands on have children. The people having lots of children are very religious and monogamous. Google Hasidic or Amish population growth...

84666a86108dee8d11cbbc85b6382083

(2399)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:46 PM

gay Cowboy, gay hunter-gatherers. The world's gone MAD !

84666a86108dee8d11cbbc85b6382083

(2399)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:47 PM

Gay cowboys, gay hunter-gatherers. The world's gone MAD !

03db20f160e58814827ae5a05a5c8792

(520)

on March 16, 2011
at 08:51 AM

Yes, homosexuality as an identity concept is an invention of the 19th century. French philosopher Michel Foucault decribed the process of discoursive construction of "Sexual identity" in his books.

11
Bcad307b240275ae3f5820ba6eb4a712

(923)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:34 PM

I'm not sure that what Grok did, in this context, is terribly relevant. Homosexuality can be both an expression of genetics and culture. I can't imagine that evidence of homosexual activity in HG societies could ever cause me to suddenly find males attractive, if I hadn't been culturally trained to be. And, even then, I suspect that engaging in cultural rituals that exist in conflict with ones own genetically defined sexuality is a recipe for psychological disaster. I've found this to be true with monogamy, which is why I have personally rejected it.

On a side note: I wonder if you're looking for justification for homosexual feelings? I'm here to tell you that you don't need justification from imaginary gods, society, or Grok. Let the gay out, friend; and apologize to no Grok. :)

05a1cb4b0c28558c2be2b7ac81b9467a

(106)

on March 15, 2011
at 03:13 PM

I've been comfortably bisexual for a while now :) It's just interesting to me.

7e1064164e012a1ead098098245b1cd4

(1197)

on March 15, 2011
at 02:15 PM

Very well said!

6
1471beca8e3adff4ae2f89d10e5f7acb

on March 15, 2011
at 02:04 PM

No, in fact, paleo has had the sometimes-troubling* consequence of making me a little more heteronormative, a little less queer. Something about the paleo zeitgeist makes the alpha male seem more attractive, perhaps because I'm a little more in touch with my ovarian impulses, a little more inclined toward a mate that will produce healthy, robust young and support them**? Or maybe just because I am becoming more of a sexy badass due to CF, so I am attracted to fellow sexy badasses? Who knows.

Not that I will be turning down any nice, pretty ladies any time soon. No amount of steak and sunshine can change the fact that my orientation is less toward "sex and gender" and more toward "interesting and nice to look at."

*Troubling because of my own personal relationship with sexuality and gender, not because I think there's anything wrong with those of you who are comfortable with traditional gender roles/heterosexuality/etc.

**Which has a delicious interestingness about it, because as I delve further into the lifestyle I think more and more about choosing not to reproduce, due to my shoddy genes.

6
Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5

(18452)

on March 15, 2011
at 02:04 PM

no. from my vantage point, women are hotter than men. that's how I see it.

6
2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:21 PM

Erm, no. No it hasn't.

4
6a4fd73b4ae4761eefec8e0d38e6f224

(1008)

on March 15, 2011
at 12:37 PM

I'm not sexually attracted to other women, but lately I do find myself more drawn toward close relationships with them - both investing in the friendships I have and starting new ones. And I think I've identified the reason:

I am not getting what I need from - have lost patience with - most of the men I meet; let's call them the North American Softie - Softus Americanus.

I date semi-actively in an urban area (Washington, DC). Lately I am repelled by mild-mannered, spaghetti-spined, emotionally needy, physically weak (or apathetic about their health), unambitious men. I feel guilty admitting this; so many of them are genuinely sweet people. Goodness knows I am at least as flawed as anyone else. But as I often lament after a date or two, "He's super nice, but I am not inclined to get naked with this person."

On the other hand, I'm VERY attracted to more aggressive (but still respectful), more capable men, strong of intellect and body, physically larger, hair on their chests, who would make good protectors and providers - not so much financially, but in the home: I am impressed, on a deep, subconscious level, by a man who knows his way around a toolchest and under the hood of my car. Even though I know the loyal guy with a great sense of humor - which I also value greatly - would make a better long-term partner.

Maybe I've always felt this way, but I am REALLY noticing it lately. Could be a reproductive mechanism; could be the paleo; could be I'm just a picky, judgmental b!%@h. I feel like a jerk admitting it all but at least I am gaining some insight into my own needs just by writing this answer. Glad you asked!

Does anyone else feel this way? Do you think it could be evidence for or against long-term monogamy?

Aead76beb5fc7b762a6b4ddc234f6051

(15239)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:29 PM

ive always said that if you can find a NICE GUY but WITH A SPINE, marry him fast. i did- my husband is a compassionate, sweet, doting father who is a self-identified feminist who loves his mother, but he is all alpha male, unafraid of emotional intimacy, confident, physically strong, bearded rugby-playing ass-kicking machine. its the best. i cant STAND needy men.

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:05 PM

I love a manly man! My hubby is a true manly man! Big, burly, hairly, strong and loud! I know he will make an excellent long-term partner, because along with his alpha male traits, there are some 'soft' traits that I get to see in our private life.

2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:04 PM

@geoff Why won't your friends date american women? I don't know any so you'll have to "paint a picture" for me

E5d59ab6d79320caf1e991cdc7971326

(801)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:47 PM

wow i need to meet some girls like you guys. i live somewhere that is largely dominated by moral veganism and the moral vegans don't seem to dig assertiveness or anything even remotely related... haha

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:35 PM

agree that I have found some great women in the South. Some of the most toxic women Ive ever met were from Los Angeles. Im sure the women of Paleohacks are the exception and are great girls/women...maybe someone should make a Paleo dating site and get everyone together :-)

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 05:39 PM

I love a manly man! My hubby is a true manly man! Big, burly, hairly, strong and loud! I know he will make an excellent long-term partner, because along with his alpha male traits, there are some 'soft' traits that I get to see in our private life. The statement "monogamy is a societal concept imposed on us" makes me angry. I don't think that monogamy is pushed on anyone - if you don't want a long-term relationship don't have one - but don't cop out with a statement like that. Some men - real alpha males - are willing and able to carry out monogamous relationships. Some aren't.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:28 PM

AccordIng to them American women are too focused on themselves and not enough on family and education. My friends have married or are in a long term relationship with women from Latin America, Europe and Asia. Most of them have found the exception to this are women from the Southern States. These are all men from Bay Area, LA and NYC. I have only one friend who married an American and she was Jewish (so minority) and he converted to her religion. Once again her respected her focus on family and education not "the world revolves around me mentality."

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:33 PM

AccordIng to them American women are too focused on themselves and not enough on family and education. My friends have married or are in a long term relationship with women from Latin America, Europe and Asia. Most of them have found the exception to this are women from the Southern States. These are all men from Bay Area, LA and NYC. I have only one friend who married an American and she was Jewish (so minority) and he converted to her religion. Once again her respected her focus on family and education not "the world revolves around me" mentality. Ive agree w/ my buddies somewhat & also

2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:20 PM

Give me an alpha male type ANYDAY. can't stand the needy, weak type, such a turn off. I've always had that preference though.

2507b557331c8a674bc81197531e609a

(4994)

on March 15, 2011
at 09:09 PM

Oh I know the type. It's definitely not exclusive to America though, we have plenty of self and looks obsessed ladies here in England too. Interestingly it seems to be in the main cities like London, unfortunatley it is spreading my way to Kent too.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 04:38 PM

That's interesting. All of my American friends refuse to date American women. Guess there's a disconnect there

6a4fd73b4ae4761eefec8e0d38e6f224

(1008)

on March 15, 2011
at 09:30 PM

I've heard a similar complaint about women, but in a generational context. Within the past year I've been approached by a number of men in their 20s - between 6 and 12 years younger than me (I'm 35). When I about the age difference - which they're aware of, either because I tell them or they've reached out to me on a dating site - they say their female GenY counterparts are not commitment-minded and too self-absorbed. So they go for older women. Which is perfectly fine by me! (Though I would like to start a family, so I continue to fish in my own generational waters.)

24fcc21452ebe39c032be6801d6bbadd

(9812)

on March 15, 2011
at 12:59 PM

Hey that's my kinda man too! It does make sense to me from an evolutionary perspective- I would think that it would be better for the species if the strong, capable members are the ones doing most of the breeding. Either way, don't feel bad about having a "type;" I know some gals that prefer the Softies, there's plenty of love to go around!

84666a86108dee8d11cbbc85b6382083

(2399)

on March 15, 2011
at 02:53 PM

Just pointing out that hobbies (cars, tools, hunting) don't really correlate with psychological aspects (emotional needs, "soft").

9e7039b63b656582f66d84c5255b436d

(1132)

on March 15, 2011
at 01:49 PM

http://evolvify.com/why-your-girlfriend-wants-to-cheat-on-you/ Of course all girls are attracted to alpha male, it doesn't bode well for monogamy; monogamy is a societal concept imposed on us.

3
Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:05 PM

The statement "monogamy is a societal concept imposed on us" makes me angry. I don't think that monogamy is pushed on anyone - if you don't want a monogamous relationship don't have one - but don't cop out with a statement like that. Some men - real alpha males - are willing and able to carry out monogamous relationships. Some aren't.

I beleive that monogamy is a personal choice, like many things in life - it is your choice to make - not societies.

Oh and - maybe let your partner in on your choice up front! (kind-of a joke) ;)

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:22 PM

I agree; however, upon more research, it seems that the scientific community is split as to whether 'paleolithic' humans were monogamous or polygamous. I guess what makes me mad is an 'excuse' for cheating based on a paleolithic arguement. We aren't homo erectus anymore ;)

0f4c4cda883cc6a16e6f264a12f97b6e

(0)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:53 PM

I'm not sure how you meant it, but I'd just like to point out that polygamy/polyamory does not necessarily imply cheating, at least in humans. I'm sure some people use it as a (very poor) excuse for engaging in non-monogamous behaviour, but not everyone considers having multiple partners to be cheating.

Medium avatar

(12379)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:39 PM

Kailen - I agree with you that polygamy/polyamory is not necessarily cheating. What I meant was I was angry with using a blanket statement rather than stating a personal belief. I also believe in full disclosure - if you are polyamorous/polygamous then be upfront about it. I obviously have a bias - having been cheated on in the past and the excuse being 'it's just the way i'm wired'. I apologize if my delivery of what i was trying to say was misinterpreted.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 06:07 PM

what's optimal for the species isn't always optimal for the individual. I am definitely for monogamy personally, but being realistic about our proclivities as a species helps me understand more about relationships.

3
9e7039b63b656582f66d84c5255b436d

(1132)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:16 AM

Desmond Morris talks a lot about sexuality in "the Human Zoo", same-sex sexual encounters do occur in the wild, but they are far more likely to occur in a zoo-like environment (like that in which we live). More likely than not the primates you are talking about studied, were in a zoo environment - although some primates in the wild use sex (same sex or not) as a means to resolve petty conflicts, humans don't in the same way.

To answer the question, if anything, "going paleo" would most likely make you less inclined to towards homosexual encounters - which is not the societal norm either.

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 10:48 AM

which just goes to show how pre-occupied I am with food/diet Oliver

9e7039b63b656582f66d84c5255b436d

(1132)

on March 15, 2011
at 10:25 AM

i don't think the original question is really referring to the diet side of the "paleo" lifestyle.

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 09:32 AM

leaving aside the aphrodisiac quality of some foodstuffs, I cannot see how ones inclinations can be attributed to diet

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 10:52 AM

and also reproduction of the species to avoid extinction - however survival must necessarily come first in the grand scheme of things

3
65430e39d7e9e9322718d016fe668051

(2944)

on March 15, 2011
at 06:50 AM

I'm a lot more comfortable exploring with women. I've always been 'men for love/sex, women for sex' but never really acted on it and kept it quiet. I'm certainly not one of these girls who makes out with other chicks at the club but I've allowed myself to not be afraid to follow my feelings.

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a

(919)

on March 15, 2011
at 03:53 PM

but does this have anything to do with your diet?

2
Fa2c369d53b96c973385c2feff9ef3a2

on April 10, 2013
at 03:04 PM

Hunter-gatherers do not willingly overshoot the carrying capacity of their landbase. Translation: not everyone needs to, or should breed. In fact, most people simply shouldn't. Because there are only so many humans the greater habitat can support indefinitely. We live on a finite world, with finite resources, and an attempt at infinite expansion of human population and the economic activity that that expansion entails is suicidal, as we can see with our current global predicament.

We can???t imagine non fascistic methods of keeping the birth rate down because 1) we've been enculturated into subtle and not-so-subtle forms of fascism and 2) we take for granted compulsory heterosexuality and the deeply-ingrained directive to ???go forth and multiply, and subdue and have dominion over every living thing that creepeth on the face of the earth.??? This dictate has been violently enforced, and the modern nuclear family, an anomaly among human familial relations, has become the norm. The majority of human cultures have taken homosexuality for granted, not just for a special ???minority??? of the population, but as a part of daily life that could include - and often did include ??? everyone. Boys overwhelmingly sleep with boys, and girls with girls, unless procreation is desired. And not everyone ??? gasp ??? needs to have children. In fact, everyone can???t. And no one needs to tell everyone they can???t, because they know how many people their landbase can support without destroying it, without people going hungry. Abortion and infanticide are also a part of daily life for most people who have ever lived. We can turn our noses up, feel better about ourselves, scoff at the "barbarity" of it all. But is there anything more barbarous than liquidating entire biomes, and driving innumerable species into extinction, just because we all feel entitled to have as many children as we want, and because we feel entitled enough to destroy the homes of the children of others to make that possible? And because we've resigned ourselves to living out a rather boring trajectory that we tell ourselves is "the good life" :: get married, have 2.5 kids, live alone with them, put your parents into a nursing home, don't share your space with anyone else, disconnect yourself from any real larger community, and feel guilty for any nonmonogamous - or queer - impulses you might have. Even if it makes you miserable. Because that's just what people do, right? Right, assimilated white middle class people in the United States under late capitalism, maybe. But the majority of people who have ever lived, certainly not.

From a scholarly study called "The Origins and Role of Same-sex Relations in Human Societies" by James Neill ::

"A survey of the extensive homosexual behavior in the animal world, a review of the virtually universal homosexual practices among pre-westernized indigenous peoples, and a consideration of the general patterns and sexual characteristics of that sexual behavior in light of what is known of the psychology and physiology of sex and the results of recent research in sexuality make inevitable some provocative conclusions about human sexuality.

"- Homosexuality among humans is an integral aspect of the multifacated sexuality inherited by the human race from its primate ancestors, not a perversion of nature, an invention of degenerate urban inhabitants, a psychosexual disorder or a biological anomaly. The evidence that humans are an ambisexual species and inherited that trait from the primate ancestors of the human race is overwhelming.

"- As is the case among the primate relatives of the human race, and many other mammal species, homosexuality plays a complementary role to heterosexuality in the reproductive strategy of the human species.

"- All human beings are capable of some degree of responsiveness to homosexual stimulus, whether acknowledged or not, especially in the adolescent or young adult years.

"- A strong tendency to homosexual behavior is a normal aspect of adolescence and young adulthood for all individuals, and provides a positive benefit to the species by diverting the sex drive away from heterosexual partners for people too young or otherwise unable to shoulder the responsibilities of parenthood, the natural consequences of heterosexual activity. Same-sex relationships among young people supports the reproductive success of the species by helping to insure that human conception occurs under more ideal conditions between psychologically and emotionally mature individuals. Conversely, the socially and culturally promoted heterosexual involvement of adolescents in Western societies represents a premature heterosexual development of the individuals.

"- Because the multifaceted sexuality the human race inherited from its animal ancestors includes a homosexual component that would be latent to a greater or lesser degree within all individuals, it could be expected that any social and moral codes that strictly prohibit, harshly condemn or otherwise demonize homosexual expression would engender considerable psychological conflict and resulting defenses and neurosis within a significant number of those subject in response to such a social and moral code."

"- Exclusive homosexuality, which has also been observed to a limited degree among other mammals, very probably became widely established in the genetic line of the human race because the extra help provided by non-reproducing homosexual members of early hunter-gatherer clans gave them a reproductive advantage that enabled them to survive during periods when human existence was marginal.

"- The special abilities and spiritual powers of berdaches and transvestite shamans that indigenous peoples attributed to a male-female spirit is very likely in large part the result of a greater functional balance between the right and left hemispheres of the brain that scientists say would be supported by anatomical differences that have been discovered in the brains of exclusively homosexual individuals.

"- While the presence of non-reproducing exclusive homosexuals among hunter-gatherer clans may have been critical to the survival of the human species, exclusively homosexual individuals have continued to support the quality of life of human societies through the aesthetic and spiritual contributions made possible by the special mental abilities resulting from the greater functional balance in the brain structures. The homosexual shamans and berdaches (both male and female) of the Paleolithic hunter-gatherers are, therefore, the genetic prototypes of the exclusive homosexuals of modern times."

And, of course, as our dry, academic, and likely straight author here is unaware of or unwilling to say, people also have gay sex because...gay sex is FUN.

1
5ff5439ef59cce014d6e1873c30a8cd6

on April 10, 2013
at 04:53 PM

the paleo diet has put my sexuality on a cycle. I havent really timed it yet or paid much attention but there are weeks where I dont think of sex at all and dont "turn on" very easily and then all of a sudden i wake up and for 2 weeks or so sex is the only thing on my mind and i am in a continuously "turned on" state of mind. it has really become apparent over the past 3 months as it has reached the height of its extremes. as a male, i did not expect this sort of development within myself. I dont mind it yet since during the off phase it is easy for me to focus on life goals however once the on phase starts i feel like an animal. I tried googling male sexual cycles and there is small evidence for it but maybe i am just a more extreme case. i am beginning to wonder how this would effect the sex life in a steady relationship or if this is the phenotype for a more polygamous individual. i would rather be in a monogamous relationship.

1
03db20f160e58814827ae5a05a5c8792

on March 15, 2011
at 05:32 PM

Yes, you find homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom, not only in humans. But I don't care.

I don't know what HGs did, but I don't care. HGs didn't have fire departments, POSE running coaches and biochemistry textbooks. So I should not have them? Gimme a break! "Paleo enactment" is ridiculous. Mat LaLonde talked about that in one of Robb Wolf's podcasts.

As for sexual preferences - I have always been open minded and gender is not an important factor in my personal "attractiveness assessment". Paleo lifestyle didn't change anything in this regard.

Sexual preferences are the result of individual biography and cultural norms and discourses. Sigmund Freud about sexuality: nothing is "natural" . It's a choice.

<< Whereas most of his contemporaries believed that sexual desire was a subordinate part of the reproductive process, Freud inverted the relationship. He not only insisted that sexual desire and sexual reproduction were two completely separate things (...), but that desire was the primary motive force and a valid end in itself. 'Sexuality', he said, 'is regarded as the more comprehensive bodily function, having pleasure as its goal and only secondarily coming to serve the ends of reproduction' (An Autobiographical Study).

Remarkably for his time, Freud went on to question the naturalistic and normative assumptions about heterosexual desire. In his supplementary note to Three Essays on Sexuality, he refused to accept heterosexual attraction as something given. Instead, he viewed it as problematic and requiring scientific explanation. 'From the point of view of psychoanalysis, the exclusive sexual interest felt by men for women is also a problem that needs elucidating, and is not a self-evident fact.'

Freud's theory of a universal bisexual potential represented a profound challenge not only to right-wing moralists, but also to the biologism of his contemporary liberal sexologists and campaigners for homosexual rights, such as Karl Ulrichs and Magnus Hirschfield, who insisted that lesbians and gay men were 'born that way'. Rejecting their view of homosexuality as a fixed biological condition affecting only a minority of the population, Freud argued: "All human beings are capable of making a homosexual object-choice and, in fact, have made one in their unconscious. Indeed, libidinal attachments to persons of the same sex play no less a part as factors in normal mental life...than do similar attachments to the opposite sex' (Three essays on Sexuality).

Source: http://www.petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/psychiatry/freud.htm

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 06:22 PM

None of these Freudian ideas are taken seriously in modern psych, biology, or anthropology. They are nonsense.

03db20f160e58814827ae5a05a5c8792

(520)

on March 19, 2011
at 10:16 AM

Melissa, your statement is wrong. There is not one "anthropology", but different fields and different methodologies. The same goes for psychology or biology. And Psychoanalysis is taken seriously by some anthropologists and psychologists. I read a new textbook about brain science /neuroscience and the author stated that brain imaging confirmed Freuds assumptions about subconscious conflicts and how therapy can resolve them. This guy takes Freud seriously. :-) Of course, modern science also debunked some myths in psychoanalysis about development of children (cf. Daniel Stern).

1
B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:04 AM

I have nothing against it but same sex does not seem to be supported by modern hunter-gather groups.

(The next sentence that is cut off in this link is that researchers who have studied other hunter-gatherer groups have also found no instances of it.)

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:31 PM

Melissa, why did you edit out my cited source and link? It's the only source provided so far in his discussion and you took it out.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:39 PM

btw, I originally tried to type this out on my cellphone and think I accidentally clicked the report button on Melissa's comment. I didnt mean to do that. I respect Melissa and her opinions.

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 07:52 PM

Seeing as that population group has different DNA then the rest of the 7 billion humans on earth I would see them as an exception. The ju/wasi are one of the oldest and purest branches of homo sapiens (no Neanderthal blood either). "Melanesians, together with Papuan people, are the only known modern humans whose prehistoric ancestors interbred with the Denisova hominin, sharing 4%–6% of their genome with this ancient human species.[7]"

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on March 15, 2011
at 01:04 PM

Haven't you read about the semen-ingesting rituals of the Melanesians?

B22e5946e28a1845a6006737e59edfc6

(2437)

on March 15, 2011
at 08:38 PM

Seeing as that population group has different DNA then the rest of the 7 billion humans on earth I would see them as an exception. "Melanesians, together with Papuan people, are the only known modern humans whose prehistoric ancestors interbred with the Denisova hominin, sharing 4%–6% of their genome with this ancient human species.[7]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanesians The ju/wasi are one of the oldest and purest branches of homo sapiens (no Neanderthal blood either).

0
194d8e8140425057fe06202e1e5822a7

(3979)

on April 10, 2013
at 04:09 PM

I'm still as straight as ever, if not more so, but I do have more polygamous tendencies now.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!