I’m hurpies. Amours dolours.
Can we at least agree, that if you want me as much as I want you, we can turn this muther out?
I have nothing to add to this discussion.
However, I would like to know what club this happened at. You know, for research purposes.
girls who have sex with relative strangers are better than girls who have sex with relatives strangely
Unless the relative stranger is someone like, say, a cousin she’s never met.
(Apologies if this has already appeared in some form. Not gone through the entire thread.)
Unless it’s that a strong male is more likely to be the leader and make sure his mate and children have enough to eat.
That assumes that emotional men are not leaders nor strong. Really, the behavior you describe sounds sociopathic. Which, I’m quite sure there have been many sociopathic leaders. It would explain the genetic basis for the sexual-sociopathic nature of the OP subject of this thread.
No, it was more having fun with your reasoning, which fails to account why bad boys get some many girls. If there were a strong evolutionary drive for women to prefer emotional, cuddly guys, then the rich, the powerful and the daredevils would all be recuded to beating off .
Yep, every woman wants to marry a sociopath just like Daddy.
Some have such low self esteem that this activity appears to elevate them, they are able to feel wanted and, while not ‘loved’ as such they respond to the appearance of love through the feeling of lust. It is a sort of addiction craving acceptance. I do believe it does cause long term damage for the short term benefit.
I would say my statement could also apply for males also.
Crazy talk. If Arthur hadn’t seduced and nailed his half-sister (and his good friend’s wife), Britain might have been better for it, too.
Well, of course. But had there been a seemingly *legitimate *male heir (this was before DNA testing, of course), Mordred (even if he was even Arthur’s - earlier tales have him the son of Lot) wouldn’t have had much of a case.
This angle was attempted in Mists of Avalon, of course, where Arthur, Gwen and Lance all have sex together, with the unspoken goal of having her impregnated by someone, anyone, with the literal defense of always having shared a bed with her husband. (Of course, it’s more than hinted that Arthur was in love with Lance, as well, so it was really win-win for him.) I’ve seen other versions where Arthur either encouraged or pointedly let Gwen know he’d feign ignorance if she got pregnant by his best friend, as long as she was discrete about it.
Jeez, y’all are judgmental. Can’t somebody just like to have fun?
Ugh. The Mists of Avalon does not exist.
Hell, if Uther hadn’t wanted to have his way with Ygraine, Britain would have been spared chaos, war, and the deaths of countless thousands. Britain probably would have been better off if everyone could control his/her baser impulses. 
Man is this a wierd wandering thread. 
it can also be a power trip from the fem side - look what I made you do
Not meant as a cite, just an admission that the idea isn’t uniquely mine.
Well, I was GONNA use Henry VIII for my example, only his subfertility isn’t quite so well established (he did apparently produce four kids after all, just not at the right time of the correct gender!), but I thought most people might relate to Arthur better.
I’ve spent a lot of time trying to figure out what this even means.
He’s proposing to penetrate you.
I thought the “amours dolours” bit might be an extremely oblique reference to Machaut or to a composition by Adam de la Halle.
Can’t help you with the hurpies bit.
I agree