# Sibling rivalry at its finest **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [December 23, 2009, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359 "2009-12-23T19:45:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/121 "2009-12-29T17:38:34Z")
> [@Ellen\_Cherry](#): > > This thread has been hanging around a week and I just now clicked read the girl’s supposed “to do” list. > > I don’t think it’s necessarily clear that the girl was utterly serious. I think it could be a young girl’s fantasy and, as exposed as kids are now to the intricacies of sex, could actually be about as harmless as a list of Boys I Like. She mentions one boy she might give her “v-card” to. It could be that she has very little sexual experience and found it titillating to list the boys that she’d like to screw … > > Maybe? Except she crossed a few off (I assume as “completed”) and one of them went down on her… ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/122 "2009-12-29T17:43:02Z")
And it was “Awesome!” ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/123 "2009-12-29T18:24:37Z")
Proof that a single hasty act can cause a lifetime of regret and shame. Would want to go through life knowing you’d done this thing? ---
**Author:** ![kath94](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/67e7ee/32.png) [@kath94](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kath94)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/124 "2009-12-29T18:28:12Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > [totally out of touch] > WTF is a v-card? > [/totally out of touch] > [@RandMcnally](#): > > Virginity. Well, this just shows you how far MY filthy mind is in the gutter. I assumed that she was narrowing down her options on sending **V** alentines Day **cards**. :o ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/125 "2009-12-29T18:51:55Z")
Well, the two do go hand-in-hand when you’re in high school. ---
**Author:** ![maplekiwi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a4c791/32.png) [@maplekiwi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/maplekiwi)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/126 "2009-12-29T20:30:03Z")
I would hope Facebook has closed Chris’s account by now. What a vindictive little shit. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/127 "2009-12-30T00:31:14Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > Well, why not cite this actual experiment, rather than merely inviting us to assume you’re right? Gender Differences in Receptivity to Sexual Offers, 10.1300/J056v02n01\_04, Published in: Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, Volume 2, Issue 1 August 1989, pages 39 - 55. The abstract: > [@](#): > > According to cultural stereotypes, men are more eager for sex than are women; women are more likely to set limits on such activity. In this paper, we review the work of theorists who have argued in favor of this proposition and review the interview and correlational data which support this contention. Finally, we report two experimental tests of ihis hypothesis. In these experiments, conducted in 1978 and 1982, male and female confederates of average attractiveness approached potential partners with one of three requests: “Would you go out tonight?” “Will you come over to my apartment?” or “Would you go to bed with me?” The great majority of men were willing to have a sexual liaison with the women who approached them. Women were not. Not one woman agreed to a sexual liaison. Many possible reasons for this marked gender difference were discussed. These studies were run in 1978 and 1982. It has since become important to track how the threat of AIDS is affecting men and women’s willingness to date, come to an apartment, or to engage in casual sexual relations. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/128 "2009-12-30T00:53:10Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > I do wonder if sexual attitudes have not changed in the past thirty years. My _speculation_ would be that they have, but not by so much that the rates of acceptance would be equal or even near-equal, but a probably not-negligible number of women might, nowadays, say yes. A 2005 study, “Clark and Hatfield’s Evidence of Women’s Low Receptivity to Male Strangers’ Sexual Offers Revisited,” M. Voracek, A. Hofhansl and M.L. Fisher, Psychological Reports, vol. 97, 2005, pp. 1120, reports on an Austrian journalism project which repeated the anonymous offers approach and got 6% positive female response to a highly-attractive male offering immediate anonymous sexual involvement. I suppose 6% is not negligible, but it’s a far cry from the 77% of men that indicated acceptance in that same study. Perhaps attitudes have changed in the past four years? I can try to dig up a 2009 study, if you’d like. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/129 "2009-12-30T00:59:32Z")
> [@torie](#): > > Of course not. A young man wasn’t the subject of the OP, however. > > **Olives** , sometimes I worry that this narcissism in society is only going to get worse, judging by the crap I see on mommy boards where I post. There’s a large contingent of mothers out there who see motherhood as a total self sacrifice, where any action taken on the part of the mother to gain a crumb of time, resources, or identity for herself is seen as a selfish act that robs the child. We have a whole generation of now toddlers being raised to be the utter center of their worlds, where all things are oriented specifically for them and them alone. > > This is all assuming that the sample of women I read are indicative of most mothers, which may not be the case. I worry all the same. You might be interested in this book - [“The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement.”](http://www.amazon.com/Narcissism-Epidemic-Living-Age-Entitlement/dp/1416575987/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262134229&sr=8-1) I worry too that it’s going to get worse. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/130 "2009-12-30T01:09:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > A 2005 study, “Clark and Hatfield’s Evidence of Women’s Low Receptivity to Male Strangers’ Sexual Offers Revisited,” M. Voracek, A. Hofhansl and M.L. Fisher, Psychological Reports, vol. 97, 2005, pp. 1120, reports on an Austrian journalism project which repeated the anonymous offers approach and got 6% positive female response to a highly-attractive male offering immediate anonymous sexual involvement. > > I suppose 6% is not negligible, but it’s a far cry from the 77% of men that indicated acceptance in that same study. > > Perhaps attitudes have changed in the past four years? I can try to dig up a 2009 study, if you’d like. I don’t know why you’re so butthurt by my wondering whether a thirty year old study about such cultural phenomena as gender rôles and sexual offers might be f limited value today. I can think of a number of fronts on which attitudes have almost certainly changed, and significantly so—acceptance of homosexuality, women in the workforce, interracial romantic relationships, etc. I think it was a perfectly reasonable reservation, and undoubtedly the motivation for the scholarly “revisit” you cite. Try not to take everything so personally, please. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/131 "2009-12-30T01:14:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Perhaps – it depends on what you view as the proper roles for men and women. Because men and women are different, a person can believe that they should respond differently without being internally inconsistent. But you’ve made a rhetorical slide here from “sexist,” which was **Freudian Slit** ’s assertion, to your own terminology of “internally inconsistent.” They are not the same thing. If people’s views on the “proper roles for men and women” results in condemning a woman for exactly the same behavior that they would ignore or applaud in a man, then they are sexist. Their opinion may be rooted in a particular set of beliefs about male and female roles, and those beliefs themselves may be completely internally consistent, but that does not change the fact that they are sexist. As a matter of fact, many of the sexists i have met were incredibly consistent in their sexism. I mean, your paragraph about beliefs regarding social roles for men and women, and discriminating based on those beliefs, is pretty much the dictionary definition of the word “sexism.” One example: > [@](#): > > **sexism** > > 1. Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women. > 2. Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender. If someone believes that a woman should be condemned or ridiculed for the same behavior that would be ignored or applauded in a man, then the only question, really, is not whether they are sexist, but whether they have sufficient courage of their convictions to actually admit that this is what they are. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/132 "2009-12-30T01:16:57Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > I think it was a perfectly reasonable reservation, and undoubtedly the motivation for the scholarly “revisit” you cite. No. The whole point of casting this as a thought experiment in the first place was to avoid having to dig up a cite for a phenomenon of human behavior in Western society that’s blindingly obvious. It’s unfathomable how it wasn’t equally obvious to you. Still, I’m pleased that I have been able to offer you grounding, in a recent study, in a peer-reviewed publication, that confirms this aspect of human behavior. I know you’ll treasure this insight. ---
**Author:** ![torie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/77aa72/32.png) [@torie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/torie)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/133 "2009-12-30T01:32:05Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > You might be interested in this book - [“The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement.”](http://www.amazon.com/Narcissism-Epidemic-Living-Age-Entitlement/dp/1416575987/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262134229&sr=8-1) I worry too that it’s going to get worse. ooh! Yeah, that one, and I saw another one by Dr. Drew (Stop laughing at me! He’s smart! I like him! Stop it!) in the bookstore that I wanted. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/134 "2009-12-30T01:32:52Z")
> [@maplekiwi](#): > > I would hope Facebook has closed Chris’s account by now. What a vindictive little shit. Shit I hope not…if accounts were closed for being an arsehole, that would be damnably awful… ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/135 "2009-12-30T01:38:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. The whole point of casting this as a thought experiment in the first place was to avoid having to dig up a cite for a phenomenon of human behavior in Western society that’s blindingly obvious. Did you look at what you cited? It was titled “Blah Blah Blah That 1978 Stranger Fucking Study _Revisited_.” When I said “and undoubtedly the motivation for the ‘revisit’ you cite,” I was referring to motivation of the researchers for conducting the 2005 study, not you and your posts to the SDMB. As to the latter half of the quote above, I’ll note that this study was conducted at least three times, so people much more acquainted with human sexuality on a macro scale than either you or I thought that doing this study was warranted. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/136 "2009-12-30T01:39:45Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > But I don’t see why being very promiscuous=disturbing. Like, what the boy did strikes me as worse because it was malicious and intended to hurt. What was so bad about what she did? She made a list. I dunno, I have never thought of myself as a prude or anything like that, but I do find promiscuous to be disturbing. Letting some guy stick his dick into you shouldn’t be done at the drop of a hat well then I don’t have much to say. I don’t know if I can explain this very well, but I wonder if the relative differences in attitude have anything to do with “innies” vs “outies”… How many here would be willing to stick your finger into a cup of something gross? Now how many would be willing to have that same gross stuff somehow “put inside”? ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/137 "2009-12-30T01:52:50Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > **I don’t know if I can explain this very well** , but I wonder if the relative differences in attitude have anything to do with “innies” vs “outies”… How many here would be willing to stick your finger into a cup of something gross? Now how many would be willing to have that same gross stuff somehow “put inside”? Bolding mine. Apparently you can’t. The very fact that you equate sex with “something gross” says a lot, in and of itself. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/138 "2009-12-30T01:53:40Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > Did you look at what you cited? It was titled “Blah Blah Blah That 1978 Stranger Fucking Study _Revisited_.” When I said “and undoubtedly the motivation for the ‘revisit’ you cite,” I was referring to motivation of the researchers for conducting the 2005 study, not you and your posts to the SDMB. Yes, that was clear. When _I_ said “The whole point of casting this as a thought experiment in the first place was to avoid having to dig up a cite…” I was referring to your initial request for a cite, in a MPSIMS thread no less, on a matter that is intuitively obvious to the casual observer. > [@](#): > > As to the latter half of the quote above, I’ll note that this study was conducted at least three times, so people much more acquainted with human sexuality on a macro scale than either you or I thought that doing this study was warranted. Of course. People who study this in detail can achieve greater and more detailed insights than a blanket, “Women don’t do that nearly as often as men.” But it’s that latter, basic, statement that I was making. In any event, your voracious hunger for peer-reviewed research to back up the remarkable idea that men are vastly more eager to engage in anonymous stranger sex with attractive women than are women with attractive men has presumably been satiated. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/139 "2009-12-30T03:40:18Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > I dunno, I have never thought of myself as a prude or anything like that, but I do find promiscuous to be disturbing. Letting some guy stick his dick into you shouldn’t be done at the drop of a hat well then I don’t have much to say. > > I don’t know if I can explain this very well, but I wonder if the relative differences in attitude have anything to do with “innies” vs “outies”… How many here would be willing to stick your finger into a cup of something gross? Now how many would be willing to have that same gross stuff somehow “put inside”? How many people would be willing to hold a running blender in their hand? Now how many would be willing to put their hand into the running blender? You see, it all depends on how you form the hypothetical. But you should note that up to now we were discussing being hit on by an attractive, hygienic stranger, not a gross one. ---
**Author:** ![Oslo\_Ostragoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a9a28c/32.png) [@Oslo\_Ostragoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oslo_Ostragoth)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359/140 "2009-12-30T03:43:48Z")
Wow, can we please set this argument aside? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sibling-rivalry-at-its-finest/522359.md?page=8)