Page Summary
doc-neuro.livejournal.com - (no subject)
anaisdjuna.livejournal.com - (no subject)
davidfcooper.livejournal.com - (no subject)
davidfcooper.livejournal.com - (no subject)
doc-neuro.livejournal.com - (no subject)
doc-neuro.livejournal.com - (no subject)
davidfcooper.livejournal.com - (no subject)
davidfcooper.livejournal.com - (no subject)
doc-neuro.livejournal.com - (no subject)
doc-neuro.livejournal.com - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2009-01-01 06:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-01 08:19 am (UTC)This article makes some pretty dubious, narrow & likely sexist causality connections in my book. Artists and poets often tend to have boundary issues which can lead to more partners. It looks at figures in history without a feminist analysis which might explain why Picasso, Byron & Thomas treated women as sexual objects with little regard to their feelings. Women in their times were more likely to be taught & to believe that boys will be boys and that they have little recourse or support, but to put up with it.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-02 12:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-02 01:01 am (UTC)The current study, however, includes both genders: Nettle and team questioned 425 men and women,...They found that professional artists and poets had between four and 10 sexual partners, while less creative people had an average of three."We found it in both the men and women, which was quite a surprise to us," says Nettle.
It is possible that artistically creative people of both genders have higher libidos, perhaps less defined boundaries, and having a high libido/low boundary peer group
provides more opportunities.
I was surprised that the participants had no more than 10 partners; those of us who were single and sexually active young adults in the 1970s tend to have had at least that many partners and often many more.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-02 07:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-02 07:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-02 08:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-02 08:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-03 02:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-03 02:50 am (UTC)