If I say so myself, I gave Pepper a good foundation for understanding the rest of the material in this burgeoning field of inquiry. The original post, on lying, is at Alpha Game.
Can we draw a connection between woman’s propensity to lie to cover up her indiscretions and her natural inclination for a permanent mate? I can’t quite figure out why women would stray and then cover it up if they didn’t need men. Then I have to ask, if a woman needs a man so much, why cheat on him? Why do the one thing guaranteed to lose him if you don’t want to lose him?
A woman’s natural inclination is not for a permanent mate. Her natural impulse is hypergamy, which when unmitigated manifests as serial monogamy and not simple monogamy.
Google “Dalrock serial monogamy” if you’re unfamiliar with the term.
This is not to say that a woman doesn’t naturally pair bond with her sexual partner, but that’s a different phenomenon.
See “Athol Kay vasopressin oxytocin dopamine” for more on that. (I think he’s getting his information from Helen Fisher.)
It seems as if Dalrock is defining marriage as the Bible does – one man, one woman for life. How can Christians even engage in conversations about marriage and infidelity with people who are not professing Christians and therefore may define marriage differently?
There’s more overlap than you perceive, I expect. I think you will understand this better by reading through Alpha Game, Dalrock, and Athol Kay. Particularly Dalrock (he repeats the fundamental ideas a lot).
The only big practical problem (which Athol Kay has addressed with some frustration) is that Christians aren’t supposed to divorce except in response to infidelity.
Both groups even have the same end goals in mind (reproducing a happy, functional family). After that it’s merely a matter of carefully considering which methods are acceptable under which conditions.
(I can’t answer questions like these with perfect confidence as they’re entirely theoretical to me. But I hope this is helpful.)
Aren’t we just asking questions that can’t be answered, or maybe throwing standards onto people who perhaps don’t want to live by them?
No. And yes, absolutely.
If a Christian wife is cheating on her Christian husband, they appeal to their local church, pastor, priest, etc. and work from there. How can Christians even make any meaningful conclusions about what people outside the church do?
I hate to say it, but I’d expect a better result if they sought help on the internet. The church as we know it is a mess.
That aside, understanding any strange culture is difficult. As Christians, we are ordered to fashion ourselves as a subculture distinct from whatever culture we happen to be in. But we can still observe the outside world from the perspective of anthropologists or evangelists or aid workers.
Athol Kay seems to approach these challenges from a biological perspective. Maybe this conversation is confused by an audience of people with mixed values?
Evolutionary psychology (Athol Kay) and Christianity (Vox Day, Dalrock, myself) are different frameworks for understanding why the world came to work the way it does. But all three are in heavy agreement about how the world works. Which is to say, penis goes in vagina and makes babby.
Thanks for recommending those articles.
Here is a rhetorical rabbit for you – it takes 5 different sources and 3 different languages…but finally she gets it!
You’ve been paying attention. :-)
Humans are strange creatures. She’ll value this small measure of truth more highly for having spent so much to obtain it. Hopefully she’s acquired a taste for it. But I digress.