Jordan Peterson on Sex

[PoetPhilosopher]

As an American... we have had conferences about sex. Same in pre-marital counseling. It is God created and enjoyable.

Maybe because it is when you talk about it and not that you talk about it? Or differences in culture/customs?

I think "cultural differences" could be a good way of framing it.

I see Americans as being a bit picky, and easily disgusted, on the subject. So while I wouldn't call it Puritan, it may be hard to relate the cultural differences at times.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

This reminds me of a story. I had an online friend who wasn't really the overly sexual sort, but went to another country, and said that the people in this other country were more prone to talk about porn as if it were two Americans talking about pop culture.

 

[YmirGF]

Nah, you didn't. You also don't seem to be able to properly follow along in a conversation.

Maybe if you spent less time building yourself up and more time paying attention to what you're actually saying. But, you do you, Hoss.

Damned, infidel dogs, eh?

 

[exchemist]

I didn’t post it, just referenced it. I’ll have to find it when I’m not at work. It’s conclusion is that while Unwin could point to correlations, he failed to show causation. He also completely biffs on the fact that the Roman Empire only began to fail after the infiltration by Christians - who obviously introduced less permissiveness, not more.

Yes that did occur to me as well. But in fact no historian seriously thinks the decline of the Roman Empire was anything to do with sex, any more than the end of the British empire was.

This of course is quite apart from the highly questionable notion that the health of a society can be gauged by the size of its empire. Unwin, being a 1930s Englishman, is likely to have had an imperialist and militaristic outlook and so may have equated the two. But if we look at, say, the Soviet empire, would we say it was a healthy society? I think not.

 

[Estro Felino]

I think "cultural differences" could be a good way of framing it.

I see Americans as being a bit picky, and easily disgusted, on the subject. So while I wouldn't call it Puritan, it may be hard to relate the cultural differences at times.

My cousin became mother at 35. So pretty late.
I went to visit her, telling her how happy I was. After all those years of marriage, and the conversation was like this:
- Oh honey, I am so happy for you. I bet you're happy.
- Very happy.
- So...did you plan this...or?
- No, not at all. You know...it just happened.
- How did it happen?
- Well...you know...it happened. I don't like going into details.
- But I love details...

Well...at the end...she did go into details.
I bet in the US I would have sounded incredibly inappropriate, even if with a relative...right?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

My cousin became mother at 35. So pretty late.
I went to visit her, telling her how happy I was. After all those years of marriage, and the conversation was like this:
- Oh honey, I am so happy for you. I bet you're happy.
- Very happy.
- So...did you plan this...or?
- No, not at all. You know...it just happened.
- How did it happen?
- Well...you know...it happened. I don't like going into details.
- But I love details...

Well...at the end...she did go into details.
I bet in the US I would have sounded incredibly inappropriate, even if with a relative...right?

To be honest....

If it was with a friend, it probably wouldn't sound that inappropriate.

However with a relative, I think that in the US, it generally might.

That being said, sometimes cousins may be more open with each other in the US as well, at times. So I'm torn on this question.

 

[metis]

Sweden has always been the most sexually disinhibited country in Europe, that's for sure.
A model. They taught us about nudist beaches.

Ya. One of my former students who was half Swedish spend her summer after graduation there, and she visited me after she got back. She couldn't believe how casual they are about nudity. But if one stops to think about it, humans have been around as humans for roughly 6 million years and the vast majority of that time we likely never wore clothes.

Since I've long been a "gym rat" who was in gymnastics at the high school and college levels and played racquetball for decades afterward, I was used to not having clothes on in locker rooms. My wife, otoh, had a hard time with being naked but later finally accepted that there's really no problem with this.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Ya. One of my former students who was half Swedish spend her summer after graduation there, and she visited me after she got back. She couldn't believe how casual they are about nudity. But if one stops to think about, humans have been around as humans for roughly 6 million years, and the vast majority of that time we likely never wore clothes.

Since I've long been a "gym rat" who was in gymnastics at the high school and college levels, and since I played racquetball for decades afterward, I was used to not having clothes on in locker rooms. My wife, otoh, had a hard time with being naked but later finally accepted that there's really no problem with this.

I think there are some benefits to normalizing sexuality and nudity.

However, as it stands, I can look at tasteful nudity in art, and see it as art. If nudity is a bit more normalized, I wonder if I would see art the same way.

 

[metis]

I think there are some benefits to normalizing sexuality and nudity.

However, as it stands, I can look at tasteful nudity in art, and see it as art. If nudity is a bit more normalized, I wonder if I would see art the same way.

I think it would as a good-looking body is a good-looking body, much like a handsome face is a handsome face. However, the cultural milieu we grow up in largely determines what is beautiful and what is not with us.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No... it isn't the orthodox priest. If you read the content you will find the quotes of a non-Christian. Your the second person to do that--I assume you just look at the author and forget the content.

Has anyone corroborated his work since 1934? I've not seen it.
And it appears to be based upon some rather outdated Freudian sexual concepts.

 

[anna.]

I think "cultural differences" could be a good way of framing it.

I see Americans as being a bit picky, and easily disgusted, on the subject. So while I wouldn't call it Puritan, it may be hard to relate the cultural differences at times.

Or maybe just have spheres of privacy that go out from close friend/relative to acquaintance to coworker, for example.

 

[Kenny]

Has anyone corroborated his work since 1934? I've not seen it.
And it appears to be based upon some rather outdated Freudian sexual concepts.

There are obviously more issues than just sexual permissiveness... but history doesn't change just because today is 2023.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To be honest....

If it was with a friend, it probably wouldn't sound that inappropriate.

However with a relative, I think that in the US, it generally might.

That being said, sometimes cousins may be more open with each other in the US as well, at times. So I'm torn on this question.

I think thats a good way of putting it. Close friends especially such things often aren't off limits. Sometimes they are, but that's because America does have some hardcore prudes. But lots of us aren't.

 

[Firenze]

Has anyone corroborated his work since 1934? I've not seen it.
And it appears to be based upon some rather outdated Freudian sexual concepts.

While some still debate his work, anthropology at large has rejected his claims.

 

[SkepticThinker]

There are obviously more issues than just sexual permissiveness... but history doesn't change just because today is 2023.

Well, for starters, that's just one dude's version of history, viewed through a particular lens he has chosen at a point almost 100 years in the past, during a time in which our ideas about the human psyche weren't as fully developed and understood as they are now.

But once again, you've answered a different question than the one I've asked.
My question was, has anyone corroborated his work since he wrote that book in 1934? I.e. Has anyone examined and verified his claims? It would seem not, given that his belief on this doesn't seem to have made its way into mainstream anthropology.

 

[exchemist]

There are obviously more issues than just sexual permissiveness... but history doesn't change just because today is 2023.

But how does history support his contention? Why is it no historian has adopted his idea?

 

[SkepticThinker]

While some still debate his work, anthropology at large has rejected his claims.

Thanks for the info.

I've only taken a couple of anthropology courses in the past but I don't recall any mention of Unwin's book or his ideas.

 

[Firenze]

Thanks for the info.

I've only taken a couple of anthropology courses in the past but I don't recall any mention of Unwin's book or his ideas.

That's why you have to go back 90 years to find a similar position. Unwin commits (at least) 2 errors. First is the 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy, and then an outright falsehood claiming that Rome fell when it became more permissive, when the fact is it began to fail when Christianity took over and enforced less permissiveness.

 

[exchemist]

That's why you have to go back 90 years to find a similar position. Unwin commits (at least) 2 errors. First is the 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' fallacy, and then an outright falsehood claiming that Rome fell when it became more permissive, when the fact is it began to fail when Christianity took over and enforced less permissiveness.

There seems also to be the (faintly fascist?) error of judging a society’s health by the extent of its empire..…..

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There are obviously more issues than just sexual permissiveness... but history doesn't change just because today is 2023.

No, but Freud has been so widely discredit, debunked and discarded that he has no clinical use or application in evidence based practices.