And what can you take from this?
That the “bonobos” treated the object of their interest as if she were an interesting person, and the women responded positively to that.
Which is basically what we have been telling you for the past few pages.
If you want to accuse someone of trolling, do so in the Pit, not MPSIMS.
I have never seen any documentary, by anyone, which was more than a very brief glance at the subject. The most that a documentary can do is give you a good basis for forming questions, which you should research.
Most documentaries are complete and utter crap, and even the best of them should not be cited as a reliable source.
The purpose of a documentary is to sell ads. It’s not to inform people of the subject. The people who produce the documentaries are attempting to put the thing together as cheaply as possible, with a fine disregard for the truth.
What similarities?
If it doesn’t make sense to look to an animal species containing 90% plus of our genes, does it make sense to do testing on other species to research medicine for humans?
Thx for you opinion
What percentage of monkeys wear clothing, get married, create religions, form sports teams, file taxes, drive cars, take photos, or pen the complete works of Shakespeare? What percentage of social behavior do monkeys share with humans in your estimation?
We test medicines on animals because if moral qualms regarding testing on people. It’s the next best thing. And once there is some demonstration of safety and efficacy at that level, we move to clinical trials.
In this case, we already have plenty of evidence of actual human behavior and there is also the bonus if being able to talk to people about their social attitudes. There’s not much need to go back to bonobos.
Furthermore, even if studying the social behavior of bonobos on order to understand human behavior has some scientific merit, if makes no sense to bring it up here because you’re not engaged in any kind of genuine scientific inquiry.
No one is saying you have to conform to anything, and it’s completely on-topic as it specifically answers the question you posed in your OP.
“Female” is not a term I (personally) don’t like or a term that the other women in this thread don’t like, it’s a term that WOMEN don’t like. Do you want to attract women or not? That is a sure fire way to NOT.
The point is, if you can’t even grasp, accept, or believe the basics of what is attractive to women (i.e., something several actual living breathing women have TOLD you), how can you understand more sophisticated ideas of what is attractive to us?
Based on your responses to the rest of the ideas people have shared with you, you don’t really want to know the answer(s) you just want to argue with people.
We also do medical studies on rats, who don’t really share much in common with us beside being mammals. We can also use pig skin for grafts, but pigs aren’t similar to us either. The amount of similarities or usefulness for human medical purposes in animals doesn’t mean they’re a great model for our social behaviors. That’s the whole nature vs nurture thing, again, where the society you grow up in helps to shape you along with your genes. Since monkeys will never experience being invited to a party or other mundane human things, their society does not function the same way ours does, and so they are an inferior source of social information in relation to humans.
And if you can just get the information straight from humans, why turn to something inferior? We’ve got thousands of years of human history chock full of social examples straight from the source; we have humans alive right now that we can ask the opinions of and study their reactions. There’s no reason to turn to something that is an inferior model. Like they say, use a primary source whenever possible. Monkeys aren’t even close.
This thread was not a “can you all give ME advice on women,” it was a “what are your thoughts on female attraction.” In other words, the idea was attraction concepts not about my personal attractiveness and so it is off topic.
I recall people started arguing with me when I didn’t choose to take their advice which I am not required to that I know of. I didn’t start arguing with THEM.
The answer given, whether requested for personal use, or just out of general interest, is the same. Any person, trying to attract a member of the opposite sex is going to fail if they don’t adhere to a basic set of guidelines. In this particular case, the example of not labeling women as “females”. So regardless of whether your question was for personal use, or asked for general thoughts, the answer still applies. You keep hanging your hat on the one thing people are telling you is wrong, rather than viewing it’s overall use in answering your basic question. You are doing the same for the other thoughts people are giving you.
It appears as if you have a set of “what is attractive to women” rules in your head, and whenever people tell you it’s wrong (even if they ARE women) you decide that it’s wrong. Why did you ask if you didn’t want to actually know, or already have your mind all made up?
Many of us ARE women, so we more than you, will know what we find attractive.
Yeah, it’s so odd that when you keep using a term that people are telling you they find offensive that it derails a conversation. Makes you go hmmmm.
The similarities you pointed out are all the mind. Attraction isn’t in my experience related to the conscious mind (can be but in a lot of cases I don’t think it is about our intellect)
Social behavior? While I am not a profesional, I think we share commonalities too, including alpha male or beta body language, being a pack species (gangs, patriotism, family, friends), showing our teeth as something to be accepted by others (smiling), playing with our young.
Okay, then we’re arguing with your faulty premise (that ape behavior has any bearing on human behavior) and offensive terminology. Your observations on one documentary do not provide sufficient data to make assumptions about human behavior which you appear to be completely foreign to. What if you posed the question thusly: “Hey, people, I watched a documentary on ape mating behavior and wondered if it had any parallels in even the most basic dimensions to human behavior. Thoughts?”
Someone probably would have agreed that some women seem to be attracted to strong men in leadership roles, much like what you observed in the ape show. Is that what you want to hear?
Hmmmm
You appear to be right.
Its a personal choice to say it and it seems its only negative association is by peoples’ interpretation.
Oh my god, what?? Attraction isn’t related to the conscious mind? You must be joking, there is no other explanation. Then why, pray tell, isn’t the president of the US married to the dumbest, blondest, most famous and artificially enhanced porn star?
Lady, are you just here to argue with me or talk about attraction?
I don’t talk to brick walls. Good luck with your fishing expedition.
That’s the problem. You don’t want to talk about attraction, you have a carved-in-stone, PBS gleaned, narrow picture of what “attraction” means, and despite the question in your OP, you refuse to open your mind to actuality.