Why war is a man's game

August 15, 2018 by Christine Tudhope, University of St Andrews
Credit: University of St Andrews

No sex differences in attitudes or abilities are needed to explain the near absence of women from the battlefield in ancient societies and throughout history, it could ultimately all be down to chance, say researchers at the University of St Andrews.

The findings, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, have implications for our understanding of the origin of war and violence-related psychological disorders.

Led by Alberto Micheletti, a Ph.D. researcher in the University's School of Biology, the research team used evolutionary models to investigate why almost-exclusively men have gone to war, until very recent times.

The mathematical analysis considered how male participation and female participation in war evolve over time, showing that they can influence each other. Previous hypotheses have suggested that male-only war is the result of fundamental differences between the sexes, for example men being on average stronger and thus more effective in war.

Mr Micheletti said: "Our study shows that these differences are not needed to explain why women generally don't go to war. We found that the more one sex participates in warfare, the less the other sex is incentivised to do so. Over time, this leads to only one sex fighting in battle."

But why male-only war rather than female-only war? Mr Micheletti continued: "It all depends on what behaviours were dominant in ancestral human populations. An initial male-bias in participation in war would have encouraged more men to fight – eventually leading to male-only war parties."

"Ultimately it could all be down to chance. Had women been more aggressive at the time when war first evolved, they could have been the warring sex. This is observed in other species: for example, in spotted hyenas, only females attack other packs. But, in our own species, this was not the case."

The research suggested that male-male competition over opportunities for reproduction, an aspect of what biologists call 'sexual selection', might have caused men to be generally more aggressive in other contexts, and this might have been enough for more men than women to initially go to war. Greater strength and effectiveness in battle, together with other , may have reinforced this pattern.

Mr Micheletti added: "In this way, the target of male aggression changed from members of their own group, to men from other groups – and resulted in raids or battles aimed at securing additional resources or mating partners from further afield."

This point can contribute to explaining why psychotic-type violence disorders affect predominantly men. So far, such disorders have been considered the consequence of genetic errors affecting aggressive behaviours aimed at group-mates. But this new study suggests that they may originate from aggression targeted at other groups, such as participation in warfare.

The fact that only men go to war might mean that genetic mutations leading to pathological disorders affect them exclusively.

Mr Micheletti concluded: "Asking a simple question about a basic sex difference in human behaviour helped us understand the origins of warfare and the ways in which our ancestral past may still – at least in part – affect us today."

Explore further: Male vervet monkeys use punishment and coercion to de-escalate costly intergroup fights

More information: Alberto J. C. Micheletti et al. Why war is a man's game, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences (2018). DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2018.0975

Related Stories

'Bisexual' beetles are simply inept, new study finds

May 10, 2018

Same-sex mating behaviour amongst male insects is much more likely to be due to incompetence, than sexual preference, male-male competition or evolutionary motivation—according to new research from the University of East ...

Female monkeys use wile to rally troops

November 23, 2016

Female vervet monkeys manipulate males into fighting battles by lavishing attention on brave soldiers while giving noncombatants the cold shoulder, researchers said Wednesday.

Study sheds light on the genetic origins of the two sexes

March 8, 2018

A new study published in the journal Communications Biology has shed light on the earliest stages in the evolution of male-female differentiation and sex chromosomes—and found the genetic origins of the two sexes to be ...

Kisspeptin boosts male sexual appetite and reduces anxiety

November 5, 2017

Increased activity of the hormone, kisspeptin, enhances sexual attraction and decreases anxiety in male mice, according to new research presented today at the Society for Endocrinology annual conference in Harrogate. The ...

Recommended for you

Excavators find tombs buried in Bolivia 500 years ago

November 17, 2018

Archaeologists say they found tombs at a Bolivian quarry containing remains from more than 500 years ago that give an insight into the interaction of various peoples with the expanding Inca empire.

Preventing chemical weapons as sciences converge

November 15, 2018

Alarming examples of the dangers from chemical weapons have been seen recently in the use of industrial chemicals and the nerve agent sarin against civilians in Syria, and in the targeted assassination operations using VX ...

52 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Litsci
3.9 / 5 (7) Aug 15, 2018
Uh, no. Obviously. This is the most politically correct B.S. I've ever read.

News flash, Einstein. Men are vastly more AGGRESSIVE. Ever heard of sexual dimorphism? A high school student can tell you that males get big and mean to compete for access to females. Competition. As in war.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.8 / 5 (5) Aug 15, 2018
Oh christ. We're tropical animals. We reproduce all year round. Women of the past were back home carrying and raising babies, replacing battle losses, and giving men something to protect and defend.

Tribes that could grow faster as well as replace those lost in combat more quickly than the other side, would prevail.

Women carry the babies, men carry the weapons. No?

This specialization is what LED to the pronounced dimorphism, and it is another result of tribal domestication of the human animal.
Whart1984
Aug 15, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Bart_A
3.6 / 5 (8) Aug 15, 2018
This is trash "research". Starting with an unsupportable initial statement in the first paragraph.
JongDan
5 / 5 (4) Aug 15, 2018
Men are more disposable than women. Male reproduction takes a couple minutes. Female reproduction takes 9 months. One man, in an environment abundant enough, can be enough for several women. The other way around, not so much.
Paraguay lost 80% of its male population during the suicidal war against Brazil and Argentina in 1860s. No problem, population can replenish quickly if men have children with 4 or 5 women. But if the same thing happens to female population? You're screwed, women trying to have children with multiple men at the same time doesn't work, because of the way pregnancy works.
mqr
not rated yet Aug 15, 2018
Women are just as likely as men to kill their children and to attack them. Point that suggest that women are equally aggresive like men, but they are smaller, so they do not attack men so viciously, but they attack children because children can not defend themselves as they are smaller.

In Spanish there is a saying 'putas hacen matar pendejos' (= whores get stupid men murdered) that might describe the history of society: If a woman wants to murder a man or many men, she will find who does the deed for her, she is not going to get her hands dirty with blood, but she is very comfortable having her soul very dirty. Many queens in history went to war, many queens in history had reigned in blood, they watch men getting murdered from their thrones.
ThomasJoseph
5 / 5 (4) Aug 15, 2018
I think that the rule that nature hates a vacuum applies to stupidity too. Even among "educated" researchers, there is a need to fill the back end of the intelligence bell curve. This "study" and this article are pretty good evidence of that.

By the way, female hyenas are far larger and stronger than the males. (Morons...)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Aug 15, 2018
We need more aggressive women then...:-) And also more women in military, STEM research, programmers and construction positions and so on...
One of my favorites
https://www.youtu...nepZS26s
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 15, 2018
Even among "educated" researchers, there is a need to fill the back end of the intelligence bell curve. This "study" and this article are pretty good evidence of that
Its pretty obvious why researchers cannot and will not acknowledge our chronic propensity to overpopulate, and the most significant result of it - congealing into tribes for the purpose of securing resources at the expense of others.

It explains so simply and so elegently what they struggle so hard to make difficult and obscure.
By the way, female hyenas are far larger and stronger than the males. (Morons...)
Yeah, in most species females are bigger than males, so they could protect their offspring from them. A powerful aspect of tribes is division of labor, which began to change our form in many very unnatural ways.
Whart1984
Aug 15, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 16, 2018
The sexual act between one man and one woman is done purely out of an emotional need that includes the need to satiate the desire for sexual arousal and sexual fulfillment. The desire to procreate is most often secondary, if at all. It is for these reasons that abortions of the innocent is a predominant function when a baby was not planned nor was it wanted - and only the desire for sexual satisfaction is/was the only attraction.
Wars notwithstanding, procreation in most societies is considered to be a 'blessing' - absolutely NOT to increase a community for the sake of making warriors.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2018
We need more aggressive women then...:-) And also more women in military, STEM research, programmers and construction positions and so on...
says Whart

You were apparently in a joking mood when you said that. Most women in the military cannot keep up with the men, and the few that succeed tend to drop out as soon as things get too rough. But there are already enough "aggressive" women. Such women are called 'Lesbians" and "Feminists" or "Feminist Lesbians" and most will not hesitate to break your arm or leg and put you in hospital for your troubles.
Women in the STEM fields have to prove themselves daily, due to their gender and the oft-told falsehood that women are less intelligent. Again, due to their gender.
WRT women in Construction, oftentimes they are to be found on a highway or street holding onto signs that say, "STOP" or "SLOW". I have never seen a female hod-carrier in my travels, but it would be interesting.
Old_C_Code
2.7 / 5 (3) Aug 16, 2018
The interests of men and women are different. You get more male engineers, and more female nurses due to their interests. The equality-centric scandinavian countries have proved this despite striving for equality in occupations.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Aug 16, 2018
The sexual act between one man and one woman is done purely out of an emotional need that includes the need to satiate the desire for sexual arousal and sexual fulfillment. The desire to procreate is most often secondary, if at all
And yet for every other animal that ever was, sex is for procreation and ONLY for procreation.

You're an idiot.

What's that - homosexuality you say? Lots of other species have mechanisms to limit growth. Gaydom expends the urge to procreate without contributing to overpopulation, something the human species has been plagued with since its inception. So we can expect to find such mechanisms in us as well.

So again, sex is entirely biological. No insipid emotions and desires and fufillments required, only for poetry-writing and divorce court-proceeding.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 16, 2018
East Asia countries... males in their most fertile age into a monastery. But it - uhh - requires to adopt some religion
The only religions left today have survived expressly by outgrowing, overrunning, and extincting the competition. The catholic church has/had an extensive system of monasteries, convents, seminaries, and the like. This was for the purpose of removing homosexuals from the general population, again for the purpose of maximizing babies per capita when necessary.

The religions you refer to were designed to pack people together as tightly as possible - eschewing worldly comforts and promoting harmony while bathing in shit-infested rivers etc - for the purpose of resisting invasion. But hindu, Buddhist, jainist, shinto etc all reproduced at the maximum rate. The excess in these tropical religions attrited in war, disease, starvation, high infant mortality, and etc.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 16, 2018
Xian gaydom as the reason for monasticism... One need only ponder the visages of christ, the soft-spoken, long-haired, robe-wearing love god and his all-male entourage wandering the countryside; and of his mother, the only woman ever to have given birth without being sullied by the touch of a man - to understand that they were CREATED that way expressly to attract homosexuals to serve as monks, priests, and nuns. Who better to defend their way of life and church secrets, hidden behind thick stone walls?

And what other reason for the vow of celibacy, than to relieve priests the hassle and burden of a sham marriage? At least half of priests are gay.

And as I say, removing them from the community enabled the vilification of the lifestyle. Those who remained would marry and reproduce or suffer persecution.

This is not speculation. The immorality and debauchery in monasteries and nunneries was well-known throughout in middle ages. Charlemagne issued a missive condemning it.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2018
In another forum I have expressed my disappointment in religion(s) - particularly the big three Judeo-Christian religions that include the more recent addition of Islam and its compilation of pseudo-religio-political precepts that are oppressive mainly toward women and girls.
Any comparison of animals with humans is lessened due to the intelligence quotient of humans versus the lesser of animals, despite the sharing of DNA/RNA to some extent. The differences are heightened even more with the fact that NO ANIMAL has evolved in parallel to its human counterparts. This is because the first humans were created and did not have parents, although they were made from the clay in which animals had trod previously.
Animals do not have sexual encounters for the sake of procreation. Animals have no such ability to judge a reason to participate in the sexual act. They just do it because it feels good.
Humans also do it because it feels good, very seldom for procreation.
Captain Stumpy
1 / 5 (2) Aug 16, 2018
@eggy
In another forum I have expressed my disappointment in religion(s) - particularly the big three Judeo-Christian religions that include the more recent addition of Islam
that makes no sense at all
"more recent addition" of Islam?
Islam existed in the 7th century
This is because the first humans were created and did not have parents, although they were made from the clay in which animals had trod previously
evidence? links/references?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2018
It has been shown logistically that those who procreate much more than the average human are within the groups that are socio-economically limited, and who are also more sexually active - again, because it feels good. The very idea that humans indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. Men and women are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort. Such is what makes them HUMAN.
There are NO human societies who procreate just for the sake of increasing their protective warriors. Such a basis for procreation is abusive and immoral. Only an abusive and immoral person would imagine that such was the case.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 16, 2018
The interests of men and women are different. You get more male engineers, and more female nurses due to their interests. The equality-centric scandinavian countries have proved this despite striving for equality in occupations.
says Old_C_Code

This is true. Women, by their basically positive nature, are more likely to pursue a career that enables them to display such personality traits as caring, sympathy, understanding, a wish to relieve pain and suffering of their fellow humans, etc.
Men, on the other hand, at least for the most part, have different behaviours that are more of a protective/proactive nature that is meant to instill confidence and a feeling of security, especially in the womenfolk. Jobs in the industrial field and Engineering most often fulfills a man's need to do something which he may deem more meaningful, as long as he has the proper intellect.

Scandinavians are mostly highly intelligent, except wrt surly immigrants from the M.E. and Africa.

Whart1984
Aug 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2018
This is because the first humans were created and did not have parents, although they were made from the clay
-And this is why you'll never understand much of anything.

Stay stupid. It's called faith.
but I don't think, that lower participation of women in wars is completely result of their larger sociableness and love of life
Uh huh. Try to picture a pregnant woman with a sword. Try to picture a pregnant woman on a long march. "My feet hurt I have to pee".

Tropical females are pregnant most of the time.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Aug 17, 2018
Humans are different. The size of the human head means that a woman spends a lot more time off her feet than a gazelle or a jackal. Although they do have many other things in common.

Human babies are also born premature, also because the head is too big to be birthed when the skull is fully formed. Babies are born helpless and need constant care.

This is why women arent soldiers, and why men are needed to protect them.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Aug 17, 2018
Animals have no such ability to judge a reason to participate in the sexual act. They just do it because it feels good
-And it FEELS good because it's the most important thing animals can do. Everything vital for the survival of an organism - eating, drinking, breathing, reproducing, exercising, even defecating - FEELS good.

You would say god made it that way to reward us or tempt us. Rational people would say that if it didn't feel good it wouldn't get done and the species would die out.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 17, 2018
Scandinavians are mostly highly intelligent, except wrt surly immigrants from the M.E. and Africa
They have no actual control over their government in similar way like many other nations. In similar way 90%+ people don't actually want wars, yet they're forced to participate in it, because they have no actual control over their lives. I'm sure most of people involved in military lobby wouldn't want to get involved in war as well, but the synergies of their financial interests are stronger than opinion of individuals. In similar way, like particles get crushed by gravity field of their collective, despite each of them "wants" to remain free and it resists its crushing.

says Whart1984

It seems that Scandinavians are not intelligent enough when it is time to elect their leaders; those leaders being responsible for all the chaos, the mayhem, and the collective "bloody nose" that their constituents are, and have been receiving because they are White.
-CONTINUED-
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (2) Aug 17, 2018
-CONTINUED-
It is the leaders in Scandinavian countries who are the worst offenders in their haste to create an atmosphere of total equality, conviviality and toleration for the "people of color" who have migrated from the Middle East and African nations (mostly intolerant Muslims), at the cost of the welfare, security and safety of their own native-Scandi citizens.
The once war-like savagery of Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes, has been supplanted by complacency and aloofness wrt their own intolerable situations as the incoming invaders take pride in the rape of Scandinavian women and girls (and sometimes boys).
But the leaders have complied with the One-World Global Disorder which they have subscribed to for the sake of the peace that they prefer overall, even if it means the elimination of the White Scandi populations who are procreating less than is normal.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 17, 2018
-CONTINUED-
Scandinavian men were responsible for spreading their Seed throughout most countries of Europe and into the Russias. They are said to have sailed to the New World also; with one native tribe in the northeast said to have thinner aquiline noses; some having brown-colored hair rather than the usual black.
The Scandi men left their writings (runes) as well as jewelry. Their sagas are recorded, and some have been associated with those of German mythology. They invaded into Scotland, Ireland, and traveled as far as Sicily to add to the Italian and Arab mixture already there.
Their warlike nature seems to have waned the furthest they got from their own homelands, until their presence became more of an establishment of culture, art, language and the like.
Scandi men are no longer warlike, as it behoves them to avoid wars in their own countries - as evidenced with the temporary alliance between Norway and Nazi Germany. Perhaps Quisling had more influence than thought.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 17, 2018
Animals have no such ability to judge a reason to participate in the sexual act. They just do it because it feels good
-And it FEELS good because it's the most important thing animals can do. Everything vital for the survival of an organism - eating, drinking, breathing, reproducing, exercising, even defecating - FEELS good.

You would say god made it that way to reward us or tempt us. Rational people would say that if it didn't feel good it wouldn't get done and the species would die out.


Actually no. The good feeling of the sexual act is strictly due to the nervous system within the body. It is the stimulation of the body's "nerve endings" in certain locations that carry the feelings of extreme Pleasure to the brain where such feelings are appreciated.
Of course it wouldn't get done if it didn't FEEL GOOD. That goes without saying.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 18, 2018
Actually no. The good feeling of the sexual act is strictly due to the nervous system within the body. It is the stimulation of the body's "nerve endings" in certain locations that carry the feelings of extreme Pleasure to the brain where such feelings are appreciated.
Of course it wouldn't get done if it didn't FEEL GOOD. That goes without saying
Like I say, you really are an immense idiot. The question is whether it is intentional or not. It's hard to imagine that someone could be naturally that ignorant.

But you ARE a religionist so hey-

Or perhaps just some bedridden troll who seeks to punish the world for his own malformaties.

Who knows?
antigoracle
5 / 5 (1) Aug 18, 2018
Imagine, hunter / gatherer tribes. Children and women (the primary caregiver), stayed close to home, gathering. Men, the hunters, ventured out. Chances are hunters of different tribes ,tracking the same quarry, would cross paths and conflict ensues. With weapons for killing, in hand, the situation turns violent. Then one day someone had the idea to let the other tribe complete the hunt and take it from them. Which then leads to the even brighter idea of following them back to their camp where the bounty is even better with the capture of women and children. Perhaps, this is the origins of warfare and the reason why it was primarily the domain of men.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2018
Actually no. The good feeling of the sexual act is strictly due to the nervous system within the body. It is the stimulation of the body's "nerve endings" in certain locations that carry the feelings of extreme Pleasure to the brain where such feelings are appreciated.
Of course it wouldn't get done if it didn't FEEL GOOD. That goes without saying
Like I say, you really are an immense idiot. The question is whether it is intentional or not. It's hard to imagine that someone could be naturally that ignorant.

But you ARE a religionist so hey-

Or perhaps just some bedridden troll who seeks to punish the world for his own malformaties.

Who knows?
tgoO1923

As I have already mentioned above wrt PROCREATION:
"The very idea that humans indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. Men and women are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort..."
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2018
Actually no. The good feeling of the sexual act is strictly due to the nervous system within the body. It is the stimulation of the body's "nerve endings" in certain locations that carry the feelings of extreme Pleasure to the brain where such feelings are appreciated.
Of course it wouldn't get done if it didn't FEEL GOOD. That goes without saying
Like I say, you really are an immense idiot. The question is whether it is intentional or not. It's hard to imagine that someone could be naturally that ignorant.

But you ARE a religionist so hey-

Or perhaps just some bedridden troll who seeks to punish the world for his own malformaties.

Who knows?
tgoO1923

As I have already mentioned above wrt PROCREATION:
"The very idea that humans indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. Men and women are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort..."
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2018
Actually no. The good feeling of the sexual act is strictly due to the nervous system within the body. It is the stimulation of the body's "nerve endings" in certain locations that carry the feelings of extreme Pleasure to the brain where such feelings are appreciated.
Of course it wouldn't get done if it didn't FEEL GOOD. That goes without saying
Like I say, you really are an immense idiot. The question is whether it is intentional or not. It's hard to imagine that someone could be naturally that ignorant.

But you ARE a religionist so hey-

Or perhaps just some bedridden troll who seeks to punish the world for his own malformaties.

Who knows?
tgoO1923

As I have already mentioned above wrt PROCREATION:
"The very idea that humans indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. Men and women are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort..."
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2018
-CONTINUED-
You say that "The question is whether it is intentional or not".
NO, the sex act is the result of a very basic attraction between humans for the purpose of attaining PLEASURE - any thoughts wrt procreation are most often secondary, unless the human couple are childless or wish to have more children, in which case many have gone the IVF route if they cannot conceive naturally.
In animals, there still is no intention to indulge in sex for the purpose of procreation. Animals have sex also for the pleasurable feelings that is inherent in the sex act. It is an instinctive impulse in animals. I have explained these concepts to you already, and yet you fail to comprehend.
You are suffering from, amongst other mental disorders, the delusion that the sex act is done primarily to have babies/puppies/kittens, etc.
Where from, how and why do you indulge in such stupidity that reinforces everyone's image of you as the clown that you are?
Sad.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2018
Imagine, hunter / gatherer tribes. Children and women (the primary caregiver), stayed close to home, gathering. Men, the hunters, ventured out. Chances are hunters of different tribes ,tracking the same quarry, would cross paths and conflict ensues. With weapons for killing, in hand, the situation turns violent. Then one day someone had the idea to let the other tribe complete the hunt and take it from them. Which then leads to the even brighter idea of following them back to their camp where the bounty is even better with the capture of women and children. Perhaps, this is the origins of warfare and the reason why it was primarily the domain of men.

says antigoracle

Such a scenario was a common activity in North and Central America and Canada amongst the native-indigenous peoples, formerly called "Indians". Prior to the introduction of the horse by the Spaniards in the 16th century, indigenous peoples were most often prone to violence toward other unrelated tribes.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2018
-CONTINUED-
After the theft of horses from the Spaniards, or taming free-ranging horses, the warring tribes had the ability to sneak into the competitor's camp and make off with the women and children and available foods and make their escape quickly.
The indigenous tribes hadn't the wherewithal to invent the wheel and elementary things such as cleansing items, so that each tribe lost many of its members (especially children and women in childbirth) through disease, starvation, freezing, and kidnappings by other tribes.
Wars were common in every society, indigenous tribes, and amongst religious and political factions.
But it doesn't only occur amongst humans; animals are also susceptible to wars, even amongst their own species.
It is a known fact that men are best able to make war on other men. It is one of the talents of men to strategise and plan for most inevitabilities for the most effective outcomes of war.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2018
The very idea that humans indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. Men and women are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort...
The very idea that ANIMALS indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. ANIMALS are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort..."

-You see your idiocy yet?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2018
the sex act is the result of a very basic attraction between humans for the purpose of attaining PLEASURE - any thoughts wrt procreation are most often secondary
"the sex act is the result of a very basic attraction between ANIMALS for the purpose of attaining PLEASURE - any thoughts wrt procreation are most often secondary"

-You see your idiocy yet?

"18 ..."As for humans, god tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals." Ecc3

Mating is instinctive in all animals, including us. So is eating. So is breathing etc. You're saying that humans and animals are different. They're not.

You say that because something feels good then that must be the reason we animals do it. Its not. Pleasure is secondary to procreating. Procreating is necessary to the species, pleasure is not.

Your religion wants to deceive you into thinking we're not animals but science tells us that we are. So does ecclesiastes but of course that was 'for the priests'.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2018
You are suffering from, amongst other mental disorders, the delusion that the sex act is done primarily to have babies/puppies/kittens, etc.
Where from, how and why do you indulge in such stupidity that reinforces everyone's image of you as the clown that you are?
Note how the religionist, when faced with the bankruptcy of his religionist delusions, deteriorates into desperate ad hoc/ad hom scramblings?

Sad.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2018
Time to sweep away all religionist delusion and deception about the source of our motivations. We are ANIMALS priest, no better and no worse.

Pleasure is how we animals perceive instinct. Priests would convince us that its ultimate source is SATAN, and therefore a weakness, and therefore something to be ashamed of, something arbitrary, and therefore something THEY can own and manipulate.

Bad doggie.

Shame is how we housebreak dogs and domesticate humans.

"7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves." Gen3
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
The very idea that humans indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. Men and women are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort...
The very idea that ANIMALS indulge in sex primarily in order to procreate is idiotically false and unreasonable, as well as totally illogical. ANIMALS are "turned on" to each other sexually due to sexual attraction, as well as emotional comfort..."

-You see your idiocy yet?


Your attempt to change the wording in MY post only shows your desperation. It is YOU that is the idiot, and all of your comments are the desperate and mindless opinions of a demented person who is controlled by demonic forces.

Your attempt to conflate Humans as just another Animal falls far short of reality, the reality that you are unable to face. Talk to your Psychiatrist regarding these erroneous thoughts of yours. And find an exorcist..fast
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
the sex act is the result of a very basic attraction between humans for the purpose of attaining PLEASURE - (...)

"18 ..."As for humans, god tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals." Ecc3


I see why you refuse to use a capital "G" when referring to God the Creator. You wouldn't want to have to answer for the disrespect that you have been giving Him in your lifetime. And you will pretend that it wasn't the Creator you were disrespecting. But at your death, you will have to answer to Him for all your transgressions, never fear.
They are "LIKE THE ANIMALS" is not the same as "ARE animals". Learn how to read.

Mating is instinctive in all animals, including us. So is eating. So is breathing etc. You're saying that humans and animals are different. They're not.


Yes they are. Sharing of DNA does NOT constitute a sameness, but ONLY a possible similarity. Scientists conflate both man and animal as the same to avoid Man's creation.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
You say that because something feels good then that must be the reason we animals do it. Its not. Pleasure is secondary to procreating. Procreating is necessary to the species, pleasure is not.


You are wrong as usual. I would advise you to read again and again my post further up where I explained about the "nerve endings" in the nervous system (in both human and animal bodies) that are the transmitters of pleasurable FEELINGS to the brain. It is that feeling of PLEASURE that is the prime motivating factor for BOTH animals and humans to indulge in the sex act.
Animals don't go looking for a mate with the thought of, "I must procreate - I must procreate". Neither does that thought occur in the minds of men and women who are mutually attracted to each other.
Where DO you get YOUR WEIRD IDEAS?

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
Your religion wants to deceive you into thinking we're not animals but science tells us that we are. So does ecclesiastes but of course that was 'for the priests'.

says tgoO1923

What religion are you referring to that wants to deceive me?
I have already said (in another thread) that religions are disappointing to me. I don't feel the need or requirement of attending a service within a structure where a man (or woman) stands in front of their audience who have come to hear the words written in the Bible - the Bible whose parts had been misinterpreted by the scribes at the time that the Spirit was upon them to write down the history of the Creation and the events thereafter.

Scientists are not revealing a secret. It has been understood for millennia that mankind is similar to animals, and only recently has it been revealed that our bodies are similar through the sharing of DNA. But the human brain is larger and more complex, which differentiates humans from animals.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
You are suffering from, amongst other mental disorders, the delusion that the sex act is done primarily to have babies/puppies/kittens, etc.
Where from, how and why do you indulge in such stupidity that reinforces everyone's image of you as the clown that you are?
Note how the religionist, when faced with the bankruptcy of his religionist delusions, deteriorates into desperate ad hoc/ad hom scramblings?

Sad.
tgoO1923 the Clown

As I don't comport as a "religionist", and neither am I faced with a bankruptcy of religionist anything, i can only assume that YOU are attempting to reduce the truth of YOUR OWN bankruptcy of a delusional nature by casting aspersions on those of us who don't give you the homage which you wrongly THINK that you deserve.
After having read the many past articles and forums in physorg where YOU have berated and lied about many innocent others, I can only conclude that you are truly mentally ill and suffer from many mental disorders.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
Time to sweep away all religionist delusion and deception about the source of our motivations. We are ANIMALS priest, no better and no worse.

Pleasure is how we animals perceive instinct. Priests would convince us that its ultimate source is SATAN, and therefore a weakness, and therefore something to be ashamed of, something arbitrary, and therefore something THEY can own and manipulate.

Bad doggie.

Shame is how we housebreak dogs and domesticate humans.

"7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves." Gen3
tgoO1923 (Clown)

I would wager that YOU are a recovering seminarian (perhaps Catholic) who has been forcefully removed from your former school after having been "infected" with a demonic possession that has left you in an uncontrollable state; and that your caretakers have given you much leeway to use the internet in the hope that you would exorcise yourself.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
5 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2018
tgoO1923
Perhaps you had been caught by a priest while pleasuring yourself at the Seminary, prompting the priest to extol the "virtues" of celibacy, along with an admonition (to you) that sexuality is Satanic and therefore verboten.
The fact that you are easily led to quoting of Scripture is a clear indication that you may have once aspired to the priesthood of some religious order.
I would also wager that you will continue to go into forums, spouting your hatred of religions and your hatred of God the Creator, and continuing to repeat your mantra that humans and animals are the same. But you err in so many ways. In a way, I pity you, but I do not sympathise with you at all.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2018
As I don't comport as a "religionist"
Of course you do whether you make up your own or not. You think the first people were made from clay. And no, you didnt make that up yourself did you?
Animals don't go looking for a mate with the thought of, "I must procreate - I must procreate". Neither does that thought occur in the minds of men and women who are mutually attracted to each other
Exactly. Its instinct. Something we inherited from the first creatures to reproduce sexually.

Where DO you get YOUR WEIRD IDEAS?
Science. Of course you think they're wierd.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2018
I would also wager that you will continue to go into forums, spouting your hatred of religions and your hatred of God the Creator, and continuing to repeat your mantra that humans and animals are the same
See, this is why I think you're one of those greasy little trolls who come here from time to time pwning people, pretending to be something you are not, because you think its clever.

You just seem so... phony.

I'm right arent I? Some pimple-faced kid with no friends?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.