Miller, believe it or not, some of the most top secret information on earth, is sex studies.
These stratification statistics are not public; they are however very easy to study in isolated environments (you could do it in a month at a school) - and the information on other mammal species is very easy to find.
Re: My bolding. How do you know this?
Sorry, but speaking as both a hobbyist and a game industry professional, this is objectively incorrect. Scoreless, co-operative or non-competitive activities are regularly defined as games. The other day I finished playing Horizon: Zero Dawn. The game does not have a scoring mechanism at all, and as a single-player only game, despite the fact that I won it, there was no loser. Last Sunday, I spent my afternoon running a bunch of my friends through a game of Dungeons and Dragons, which was 100% co-operative: if any player loses, it’s a loss for the entire group. Nobody wins by having another player lose. Really, nobody “wins” at all. Nonetheless, you will find very, very little argument out there that D&D doesn’t count as a “game.” Weekend before that, I played a card game called “Sentinels of the Multiverse,” which is, again, 100% co-operative. The players work together to overcome the game mechanic. In that case, there were no winners, just losers: we weren’t able to overcome the game mechanic. Despite nobody winning, we all enjoyed ourselves thoroughly.
These are all widely accepted as meeting the definition of “game,” despite not possessing any of the qualities you think are necessary to the definition of the term.
Miller, let me expand on this. The statistics you’ll find on other mammals will be birth stratification (the don’t have orgasms and don’t use non-reproductive sex to mark social status) The general rule of thumb for mammals is that 90% of the offspring come from 10% of the males… the human species has extremely low birth stratification, basically 1:1 correspondence. So it’s a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
So I guess masturbation is the only ‘approved’ mechanism for sex. Or would that be raping myself?
Sure would make for an accelerated extinction for humankind, though.
Nevermind.
I’ve spoken with some of them. The issue is actually very simple, it’s considered a national security issue; the problem is that if the stratification decreases; potential fallout from hammering these statistics, then it’s shown to cause less aggression, which effects recruitment for war. If all the countries don’t do this, then the ones that do, may be vulnerable; may be. It also impacts financial systems that utilize corruption to maintain themselves; if corruption is removed from the mating process - the transparency and communication doesn’t divide, control and conquer. It’s a touchy subject.
Well, the idea that non-human mammals don’t have orgasms, and don’t use non-reproductive sex to mark social status is completely wrong, so I kind of doubt the accuracy of your “90% of the offspring come from 10% of the males,” statistic. Perhaps you could provide a link to your source for this information?
??? I don’t see how I implied that. Now this is all “going south”.
I think this thread has come to a close again…
Winning something that others cannot win, is competitive - my final comment about those types of games; some people are way better at these conditions than others; and it doesn’t reflect translation of wealth to feel good for winning it, in the grand scheme. That’s my point to the regard of that type of game.
There’s a technical distinction between ejeculation and orgasm; bonobos are the only other species known to orgasm.
Who is “them”?:dubious:
I am aware of the distinction. You’re still wrong.
Also, if studies on human sexuality are a “top secret” “national security issue,” why did they tell you about it?
Because I taught them some things, and they know I can’t prove it.
Well… I’m behind the times then. I didn’t think any “heat” animals had orgasms.
Did you “teach” “them” the same “thing” you “taught” us here?
Yes. Precisely. They understood it the way I understand it. As a courtesy, I was given the stratification statistic.
So, your whole appeal to “mammals” was in irrelevant sidebar, doing nothing for your claims. If humans are “different,” then you cannot use “mammals” to establish anything about humans.
This is not the way top secret information is distributed. The problem you’re going to run into now is there are people on this board who have a lot of real expertise on almost any subject you might imagine. And you will get called on it. So if you were given this data in this way, it is not top secret and you mistakenly believe it is.
Alternatively, you can see what I think here.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20357297&postcount=2990
Sorry, can you remind me which statistic that was again? Was that the “90% of offspring come from 10% of the males” stat?
I still don’t know who you think “they” are. Or why they would give you top secret statistics for spewing the same incoherent rant you just gave us.
Also, I’m not trying to be snarky with this next question, but is English your first language?