digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at news.bbc.co.uk —

Sexes split over one night stands

news.bbc.co.uk — Many women are left unhappy in the aftermath of casual sexual encounters. Four out of five men, in contrast, said they were happy with a brief fling.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Diggnabbit, on 06/29/2008, -5/+206This just in: grass is green.
  • Croecop, on 06/29/2008, -7/+137How is this relevant to the users of Digg?
    • kuantan97, on 06/29/2008, -29/+6How are you relevant to the users of Digg?
      • mardraum, on 06/29/2008, -4/+16that insult was bad and you should feel bad.
      • kuantan97, on 06/29/2008, -11/+4"that insult was bad and you should feel bad."

        I'm crying a river.
      • Nitrodist88, on 06/30/2008, -0/+1You will not win.
    • Meursault, on 06/29/2008, -1/+29A lot of us have 1 night stands with female blood elves in WoW. No complaints, so far. Could it be they're really men? Nah.
    • agnistus, on 06/29/2008, -10/+2Because digg users are nerds and never get laid.
      • bphicke, on 06/29/2008, -0/+8Wouldn't this be a reason for it NOT being relevant to Digg users?
    • aussiessuck, on 06/30/2008, -0/+1It's like International news. It doesn't always directly affect us but sometimes it affects someone we know. It's good to be informed.
  • Nidy1, on 06/29/2008, -2/+131New study shows that men like sex. More at 11.
    • dmbftp, on 06/29/2008, -3/+19I'm not waiting until 11 for more sex!
      • PopcornDave, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Going after your teacher earlier are you?
  • kuantan97, on 06/29/2008, -2/+41I am happy with the arrangement.

    Signed,

    Anonymous Fellow
  • dha07030, on 06/29/2008, -1/+24No ***** you don't say.
  • missingship, on 06/29/2008, -13/+14What girl in their right mind expects more than anything from a ONE night stand?
    • trevah, on 06/29/2008, -2/+11What does that even mean?
    • StaticThunder, on 06/29/2008, -8/+4What girl is in their right mind having a one night stand?
      • Rikkochet, on 06/29/2008, -0/+12I would guess either one who wants sex and nothing more, or one who wanted more but got really bad sex and decided not to have another go at him.
    • solid12345, on 06/29/2008, -4/+5Don't believe a girl who says she just wants to have sex, they cannot resist the emotional temptation to call you back and say "hey umm....you want to go to a movie"

      They are hard-wired to seek more than just booty.
    • zeabu, on 06/29/2008, -2/+3oohhhhhh yes.. Once again truth is getting dugg down...
      If you're having sex with a stranger you only just met, and you're expecting a full blown relationship, because of that, there's seriously something wrong with you.
    • maz2331, on 06/30/2008, -0/+3What is this "girl in her right mind" of which you speak?
    • charlietuna, on 06/30/2008, -0/+2Sex is linked to intimacy by women. Some say it's the post coital release of oxytocin. Either way they "feel" a connection where the guy just feels like he has busted a nut.
  • nbyn, on 06/29/2008, -2/+12that's one hairy couple in the picture.
    • agnistus, on 06/29/2008, -3/+0lol
    • solid12345, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3I want to know what the ***** they are wearing, looks like some medieval skullcaps with latin writing on them.
  • chanelgal, on 06/29/2008, -3/+7tell me something that I don't know... common night stands occur when you go to the club, bar, etc.. . it is silly to think that whoever you slept with the night before might be "the one".
  • btraxx, on 06/29/2008, -1/+56Just four out of five men?
    • BingoPower, on 06/29/2008, -1/+52The missing one is Emo.
    • StaticThunder, on 06/29/2008, -0/+87The fifth woke up 3 days later with a scorching case of herpes and missing a kidney.
    • libertao, on 06/29/2008, -1/+311 out of 5 men had whisky-dick.
      • mardraum, on 06/29/2008, -0/+25whisky dick is no joke, son. :(
      • passedoutghost, on 06/29/2008, -0/+01 out of 5? There's probably a lot more than that.
    • Wakkyweed, on 06/29/2008, -0/+12And four out of five dentists suggest sugarless gum for their patients that chew gum.

      The other one suggests chewing tin foil.
    • willywong, on 06/29/2008, -2/+24The fifth guy ended up with a virgin who started crying halfway.
      • jnordb, on 06/29/2008, -0/+19She also told him they were soul mates.
      • maz2331, on 06/30/2008, -0/+2The fifth guy was gay and then became a priest.
    • blinktude, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1yea because the fifth one had to pay
  • mardraum, on 06/29/2008, -0/+49the other one out of five swore off alcohol for good after nearly being crushed to death during the previous night's proceedings.
  • BrandonKutzler, on 06/29/2008, -4/+37Obvious study is obvious.
  • StaticThunder, on 06/29/2008, -1/+74Men give other things (affection, understanding, commitment) as a way of getting sex. Women give sex as a way of getting other things (affection, understanding, commitment). So a one night stand where a man gives nothing, and the woman expects something... well... you figure out who will wind up being dissatisfied.

    Its been my experience that no matter what, everyone expects something more than what they asked for.
    • mchisari, on 06/29/2008, -2/+30
      See, if women didn't enjoy sex, the female sex toy industry wouldn't exist. Men want affection, understanding and commitment, too, just like women want to get off.

      This isn't the 1950's anymore, we understand a lot more about the genders than most would realize reading digg.
      • StaticThunder, on 06/29/2008, -2/+22Sure. And I'm sure 4 out of 5 women are also disappointed that sex toy isn't able to cuddle with them and cook them breakfast.

        Generalizations are just that, generalizations.
      • Haoie, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1You're bound to expect some disappointment in any relationship, very short term or otherwise.
    • SuicideMouse, on 06/29/2008, -0/+17People who want one night stands and just that are the only people who should be having them. I personally want more then a one night stand when I find a girl I like. Then again I'm a hopeless romantic.

      I can see the attraction to having them, but I can also see the consequences and at least to me, the bad outweighs the good here.

      • lisaawesome, on 06/29/2008, -0/+9I'm with you on this. I know one night stands are not going to make me happy so I don't do that. I would rather work on a relationship than screw a random person every night.
      • jazzguitar18, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2two words: Consistent Sex

        your not guaranteed to get laid whenever you want when you have one night stands, in fact if your game is really bad ( yeah mines not good either no worries ) it might be like every week or month or year or years.

        Where as if you have a relationship you get:

        Consistent Sex... where it's okay to call up and be like hey we should get together right now and wam bam thank you mahammmm you've got your self a slow roasted turkey cookin here.
  • seantubridy, on 06/29/2008, -3/+2Well, duh.
  • s0crates82, on 06/29/2008, -1/+23Actually, the article is a little deeper than the Digg title suggests.

    The balance is: a University researcher thinks that women aren't programmed to sleep around and be promiscuous as possible, contrary to what you may be being taught by primetime television, and that for actual emotional fulfillment bonding with a single mate is preferable.
    • Jonez176, on 06/29/2008, -1/+0.... Nahhhhh... Lol
    • StaticThunder, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3Tell that to the bonobos.
    • kh99, on 06/29/2008, -0/+15"Actually, the article is a little deeper than the Digg title suggests."

      Yeah, that's true a lot of the time. Unfortunately, people want to rush to be one of the first 20 to make the obvious stupid comment based on the title instead of reading the article.
      • libertao, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3But how else am I going to get to say "first!" ?
      • kh99, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1View "Upcoming" and post to every story with no comments yet.
    • Schrodinger2, on 06/29/2008, -3/+7but but... tila tequila!
    • lgm1213, on 06/29/2008, -2/+7maybe these women are just having bad sex in these one night stands and that's why the men are satisfied cause there is no need to try your best cause the day after it won't matter
    • dha07030, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Still Obvious
    • antidense, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3Not necessarily. Women really have two possible strategies. They can either sleep around with highly physically attractive men at the expense of resources, or they can try to get a man with plenty of resources (a.k.a money) to commit to them at the expense of physical attraction. No matter what, they will try out both strategies to find the best deal available for them. Of course, given that actresses (and writers) on primetime television make plenty money themselves, they probably have little need of the second strategy... which could reflect in their acting.
    • gryphon50, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2obviously emotional fulfillment is impossible with a one night stand. But you must also acknowledge that sexual fulfillment is pretty impossible if you stick with one person for life, even if you're a woman. Your husband could look like an Adonis and be the love of your life, but eventually you would want to hook up with someone else...I'm not saying you would do it but you would want to.
    • synwolf, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3The study assumes that the opinions of women in whatever society they polled is relevant to evolutionary causes. This is not necessarily the case - it could be an artifact of the society they live in. Look into the Mosuo women, for example. Their culture stands on the foundations of matrilineal inheritance and, essentially, one-night stands. The difference is that, since inheritance is passed down through the mothers, it doesn't matter who the father is.
    • aussiessuck, on 06/30/2008, -0/+0I know a fair few chicks who are complete whores (the kind that don't charge)

      Anyone want a hookup?
  • raober, on 06/29/2008, -7/+20Um...duh.

    Evolutionarily speaking, the best way for men to pass on their genes is to impregnate as many women as possible, and the best way for women to pass on their genes is to nurture the young as well as possible. A man can impregnate a hell of a lot of women during a 9-month gestation period.

    So, get out there and have fun, if you're a man. It's natural!

    • Adenosine, on 06/29/2008, -0/+5orly?

      You don't think it would be evolutionarily wise to protect your offspring? What about ensuring your women doesn't go out and get knocked up an hour before you want to knock her up. How well will your fling's next guy treat your children? How well could a pregnant woman survive in the wild for 9 months alone??

      One night stands are the best way to pass on your genes.
      • Wakkyweed, on 06/29/2008, -0/+5Yes, orly. A man can have sex with lots of women to spread his genes around, but that doesn't also preclude protecting one woman so that a particular set of offspring has an even better chance of surviving. It's also very handy if he can impregnate another man's woman, therefore unwittingly causing another man to take care of his children for him.

        In the modern world, this is known as cheating on your wife.
      • zeabu, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2The wife (of that man that will take of your kids) also cheats...
      • ConAmoreEFuoco, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1"You don't think it would be evolutionarily wise to protect your offspring?"
        Not necessarily. You don't need to worry about protecting any of your offspring if you have a vast number of offspring. It might even be advantageous to be polygamous. For instance, if you are monogamous and impregnate only one female in a nine month span, then you'll probably get one offspring. On the other hand. if you are as polygamous as possible and mate, say, 50 times in that nine month span, you are bound to get at least one offspring, probably several. Therefore, polygamy would be advantageous, at least in an environment where paternal aid is not necessary for survival of the mother and fetus.

        "What about ensuring your women doesn't go out and get knocked up an hour before you want to knock her up."
        If you're being promiscuous, you wouldn't have a woman. You'd just find a different mate. No problem. You might waste a little time by mating with a newly-pregnant female, but the amount of time is negligible when considering the vast amount of mating you are undertaking.

        "How well will your fling's next guy treat your children?"
        That is a consideration. But, assuming that all males engage in promiscuous breeding behavior as you are, you don't have to worry too much about other males' interaction with a mother of your offspring.

        "How well could a pregnant woman survive in the wild for 9 months alone??"
        Some species of animals do have single mothers. It isn't impossible. It depends upon the environment, though.
    • trevah, on 06/29/2008, -4/+1That's the excuse I use too, but let's be honest here: Firstly, I don't want to be getting aaaaaanybody pregnant. Secondly, I just do it cuz it feels good. Plus, not to be a chauvinistic pig or anything, but the conquest is always nice. Of course that's all speculation though... I mean I use digg so I'm just up ***** creek without a paddle, to be as eloquent as possible.

      Wow, that didn't come off as douchey whatsoever...
      • gryphon50, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1so if two people engage in a sexual act it's a "conquest"? How do you figure?
      • trevah, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2In terms of one night stands it's more of a game than in a real relationship, the game being seduction and the prize being sex which is generally withheld by the female. So if the guy successfully pulls it off, then the girl has essentially lost. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying I know that's how a lot of guys see it. It's simply a game of chase... and the woman is the prize. Out of a real relationship though, it's a lot easier to see the woman as an object of conquest rather than someone you've made love with/shared the experience which would (hopefully) be the case in a legitimate relationship.
    • Dernit, on 06/29/2008, -1/+7RTFA and also, get a clue.

      Monogamy or even polygyny is beneficial to the male because it ensures that the offspring are his own, and he can provide for its survival. In chimpanzees, if a new male takes over a group, it's not unusual for him to slaughter all the young - to trigger estrus in the females and ensure he's not wasting his energy on other's offspring. Think about it before leaving your kid to a stepdaddy.

      Polygamy is beneficial to the female because she's getting the most genetic variety in her offspring. Some will have a better chance of survival. When a woman is ovulating, she'll be much more attracted to bigger, buffer men, than the joe schmoe provider she may have settled for. There's a reason for this.

      Unfortunately, the article is missing a discussion of cultural behaviors. In a male dominated society, of course we'll program women to feel shame over promiscuity - it reduces the security a male has in the knowledge that his children are actually of his genetic material... However, if you want to look at a female dominated society, check out bonobos. They have sex constantly, in a variety of positions with both sexes, with a lot less conflict. So you have to wonder if the human species took the right route.
      • Wakkyweed, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4I want to grow up to be a bonobo!
      • trevah, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2You're way too intelligent to be making coherent posts on digg. It's a bit of a waste.
    • Nudar, on 06/29/2008, -1/+4Tell that to the black community where 70% of children are born out of wedlock.
  • JasonCox, on 06/29/2008, -1/+42In other news, 4 out of 5 Digg users wish they could have a one night stand. The 1 remaining Digg user makes a joke about what would happen if his wife saw his comment.
    • Wakkyweed, on 06/29/2008, -0/+10I don't think my wife would be pleased if she knew exactly how many one night stands I had before I met her...

      There's your obligatory joke from the rare digg user that has been laid. :-Þ
      • gryphon50, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0are you sure you know how many men your wife slept with before she met you?
      • maz2331, on 06/30/2008, -0/+3Some Digg users are actually, well, married. To a woman.

        Oh, we don't get laid either....
    • div2n, on 06/30/2008, -0/+2My wife knows exactly how many one night stands I've had--one. She doesn't know it was some of the best sex I've ever had. Not sure she would care if she did, but I didn't bring it up.
  • Meursault, on 06/29/2008, -1/+16Sex in the City wouldn't lie.
    • aussiessuck, on 06/30/2008, -0/+0Sex in the City can ***** right off.

      (and she has a face like a foot)
      • Shamrockette, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1A face of a horse is more like it.
  • moomincharlie, on 06/29/2008, -2/+30I had been with my boyfriend for 6 years and we broke up because in his words he "wanted to be more of a lad". He slept with someone just 3 days later but he came right back.

    Long term relationships > one night stands... you don't know what you've got till it's gone.

    (EDIT: no i did not take him back)
    • Meursault, on 06/29/2008, -3/+9And you let him?
      • moomincharlie, on 06/29/2008, -1/+9Hell to the no! ;)
      • Adenosine, on 06/29/2008, -3/+7nice, hope you went out and slept with all of his friends.
      • trevah, on 06/29/2008, -2/+2It's one of the few things women do consistently. Wow, I'm on fire...
    • adjustafresh, on 06/29/2008, -5/+12So he temporarily dumped you because he wanted to shag someone else? Did the deed, and back in your lovin arms. Brilliant!
      • StaticThunder, on 06/29/2008, -0/+19If he had pulled it off, he would be a legend. As it is, he sounds like a chump.
    • terajoule, on 06/29/2008, -0/+9"you don't know what you've got till it's gone."
      Someone wrote a song about that exact same thing.
      • antidense, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4Wasn't it about trees or something? Ah never mind, I have go back to work paving parking lots.
    • nafnosseb, on 06/29/2008, -0/+6I got 3 questions for you.
      1:Is your name moomin?
      2:Is his name charlie?
      3:Was he pissed that you changed all the passwords?
    • maz2331, on 06/30/2008, -0/+2You should have shot him.
  • wildfire, on 06/29/2008, -0/+25"Thank you, Diane. Sex... some people have it anonymously. 'What kind of person might do that?' You might ask. Well, I'm about to find out. I just picked a complete stranger in a hotel bar, and he's in the bathroom, possibly doing drugs. Watch as I have sex with this potentiality dangerous man, as we take you in depth and undercover."
  • mchisari, on 06/29/2008, -4/+23
    So, wait, it's evolution that causes women and men to respond this way, and not culture? That seems like specious logic to me. What's the basis of that argument? If we're talking purely from an evolutionary perspective, how do we explain the casual sexual practices of Bonobos? Why do evolutionary biologists never take culture and social norms and expectations into consideration?

    Thing of it this way: You have a woman in Los Angeles who goes out clubbing and has a one night stand. You have a woman in a Southern Baptist community in Georgia who goes to a local bar and has a one night stand. One has a culture which accepts casual sex, the other has a culture that shames and rejects it. Can we say that, due to evolutionary constraints, both women would likely have similar responses? If not, which of the two is the proper "biological" response? What about a woman in Iran or Saudi Arabia?

    If you can tell, I'm not a big fan of jumping to biological conclusions like this, especially when ignorant of cultural conditioning.
    • lgm1213, on 06/29/2008, -4/+4what if they just aren't enjoying it cause the dude can't deliver.
    • Asheis, on 06/29/2008, -3/+3Looking at it from the biological perspective is very easy:

      Women don't like one-night stands because they want the male to stay around to take care of the child she's supposed to have with him. She is evolutionarily programmed to try to keep him around.

      Conversely, Men want to spread their genes to as many potential mates as possible to guarantee he will have offspring.

      I don't see why looking at it from a biological perspective is so "specious". honestly, it makes perfect sense.
      • mchisari, on 06/29/2008, -2/+6
        Like I said, Bonobos. From a biological perspective, their embrace of casual sex, homosexuality, mutual masturbation, multiple partners, etc. makes no sense. However, bonobos, like humans, have enough logical capabilities in order to form social and cultural patterns which do make sense.

        A biological perspective only makes perfect sense if you take a functionalist view that doesn't consider culture and society.
      • Asheis, on 06/29/2008, -4/+2I disagree with you, respectfully. Bonobos are a special case.. writing off biological causes for this sort of behavior isn't a good idea. I'm of the psychological school of thought that much of our behavior is steeped in both biological features as well as cultural shaping. I still think it's very important to give biologic it's due. I could look some serious, peer reviewed articles for you on this subject.. but I honestly don't feel like it's worth that much effort.
      • Maratanos, on 06/29/2008, -2/+4There is no such thing as a special case. If you have to make exceptions to your rules, you don't have the right rules yet.
      • Asheis, on 06/29/2008, -2/+2No such thing as a special case? this isn't physics. Biology doesn't have any overarching prize theory that explains everything. There are TONS of special cases in the world of biology. That's what makes this world so amazing.. all of the different animals and all of the ways that behave different from our expectations.

        Saying there aren't any special cases in nature... is just kinda... not correct. :)
      • mchisari, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3
        Why in the world would Bonobos be a special case, but humans (with an exponentially higher ability to reason) not be?
      • zeabu, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4mchisari: maybe Bonobos are not a special case, but we are.
    • mattearle, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2Cultural circumstances may play a part but is not the underlying cause. The behavior observed in this study is considered biological because it transcends cultures and environmental circumstances.
      • mchisari, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1
        There's no evidence in this study that it transcends cultures and environmental concerns. Where did you pull that from?
    • antidense, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Culture just offers different pathways for a society to allow the same behavior to occur while offering some form of plausible deniability and the appearance that it's actually trying to prevent it. In Iran, they allow "temporary marriages" whereas in most places in the U.S., it's "escort services." Even if the Georgia woman feels guilty for her "sin", she can be "saved" if she does certain things and she can be accepted again. The acceptance and dissapproval are still there in both cases, just on different levels.
    • Maratanos, on 06/29/2008, -1/+5"Why do evolutionary biologists never take culture and social norms and expectations into consideration?"


      If all you have is a hammer...
  • xomb13z, on 06/29/2008, -1/+11"and if a high quality man would not stay with them forever, they might at least get his excellent genes for their child."

    I'm pretty sure abandonment presupposes that you are neither high quality nor do you have excellent genes.
    • johndavidjack, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1And some animals eat their kids.

      Let's try not to follow science so closely next time...
    • Ravatar, on 06/29/2008, -2/+5Abandonment? HAHA

      On the heirarchy of needs, replication is way the ***** higher on the list than "meaningful relationships".
  • akohut, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Isn't this common knowledge?
  • wanderingsun, on 06/29/2008, -1/+5I wouldn't mind a one night stand right now, actually.
  • ajv570, on 06/29/2008, -2/+1How is this new news?
    • Soave, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Maybe you should read the full article.
  • FeloniusMonkey, on 06/29/2008, -1/+8Ah... research dollars at work.
  • mal1964, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3Sometimes I like them, Sometimes i hate them,. Sometimes I'm afraid of them.
  • digitallysick, on 06/29/2008, -1/+6One night stands rock! I know plenty of women that are more into them than men now days, and don't want attachment, dates, or calls.
  • mal1964, on 06/29/2008, -5/+2Time to take her home
    Her dizzy head is conscience laden
    Time to take a ride
    It leaves today no conversation
    Time to take her home
    Her dizzy head is conscience laden
    Time to wait too long
    To wait too long
    These conversations kill
    -STP-
  • sovereign3, on 06/29/2008, -0/+12Why do all British studies seem to be such odd-- and sometimes obvious, studies that have no real research value?

    Don't academics in the UK have something better to do?
  • CHANNELOCK, on 06/29/2008, -2/+3They Ho with the hole wants more from some dance club drunk shagging her on the carpet at 3 in the morning...well I'm pleasantly surprised
  • WWJeffersonDo, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1...A survey said....
  • pinkflyd, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Some ppl have got very sad life,s if this is all they can work out in there spare time.

    o well back to me coffee.lol
  • Aturaten, on 06/29/2008, -1/+42I tried a one night stand once. Man my legs were tired.
  • blackhappy, on 06/29/2008, -3/+2And women wonder why that there are some situations that are neither wanted or belong in.
    • nafnosseb, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2You are too drunk to be commenting... Go have a one night stand.
  • SilverBlade2k, on 06/29/2008, -2/+10Nope...I would never want a one night stand. I want a long-term relationship with a girl. For me, it's either long term, or I won't bother. One night stands are not for me.
  • LukeMadrid, on 06/29/2008, -1/+4Let's assume that having sex with many different men and raising kids from many different men was evolutionary advantageous.

    Women still might feel "negatively" about it based on society, upbringing and societal conditioning rather than any "evolutionary" reason.
    • RationalXubrnce, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3 We might as well assume 2+2 = 5 while we're at it.
    • antidense, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Our societal norms are just as much a product of evolution as our own urges. Sluttiness can be evolutionary advantageous for a woman, but it incurs a great fitness cost to many other (possibly less attractive) women in terms of the faithfulness of their partners. Those other woman then paint sluttiness as a bad thing to discourage it, and it becomes a social norm.
    • hamidious, on 06/30/2008, -0/+1No it wouldn't be "evolutionary advantegous" because that would mean humans revert to being more like animals which is a step backward. Also it would mean having too many sexual partners, spreading STD's like crazy. And nobody would know who their father was and family structure would be weakened. That doesn't sound evolutionary.
      Also, rape & murder would eventually become OK if we think this way, because the rapist would prove he has better genes by killing the "alpha" male and raping all the weaker females.
      I understand people like to simplify things but god, some of the extreme evolutionists anecdotes is too simple it's stupid. Humans have a will and they can rationalize, they are not nature's pawns.
  • Shippwreck87, on 06/29/2008, -16/+25…………………………………….__,,,,,,,---,,,,,,_…………………………………………………………
    …………………………_,,,--~’’¯¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯’’-,,_………………………………………………….
    …………………….,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯’~,_……………………………………………
    …………………,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~-,,………………………………………
    ……………..,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; _,,_ ; ; ;¯’-,…………………………………..
    …………..,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’_ ¯’-, ; ; ; ; ‘,…………………………………
    …………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-~’’’’’~-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-‘;;;’, : :||; ; ; ; ; ‘,……………………………….
    ……….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘/ :,-~’’~, : ‘,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,-‘ : // ; ; ; ; ; ;’,……………………………..
    ……..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,| : ‘-,;;;;,-‘ : /’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯’’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,……………………………
    …….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,,___,,-~’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,………………………….
    …….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;-,;;’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-………………………….
    ……,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;-;;;;| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |…………………………
    ……| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-‘,;;;;|’’-~ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,…………………………
    ......| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;---,,,,,,,_,,,,-~’’, ‘-,;;;| ,,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,……………………….
    ……| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯’’~-,,,_ , , , , , , ‘,;,’,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;……………………….
    ……| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,~-,, , ,,’’,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,………………………
    ……’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’-,,¯’’;;;;| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,………………………
    …….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,_,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,………………………
    …….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,……………………..
    ……..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; …………………….
    ……… ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,……………………
    ……….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|……………………
    ………..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,………………….
    ………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,--~~--,, ; ; ; ; ;,--------,, ; ,--~, ; ; ,,-~, ; ;,--,,;,,-~~-,, ; ; ; ; ; ;’,………………..
    …………| ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’ . ,,--,, . ‘-, ; ; ; ;| . ,-,, . ‘, | . . | ; ;’-, . .,,/ . ./’-,,--, . ‘, ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,………………
    …………| ; ; ; ; ; ; | . .,’ ; ; ;’, . .| ; ; ; | . .’-‘ . ,-‘ | . . | ; ; ; ‘-, . . .,-‘ ; ;,-‘ . ,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,…………….
    …………’, ; ; ; ; ; ;’, . ‘-,__,-‘ . ,’ ; ; ; | . .| . . . | . . |___ ; ;} . . / ; ; ;’----‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,………….
    ………….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,,_ . ._,,-‘ ; ; ; ; |__| .__ ;|_____/ ; ;/__/ ; ; ; ; (¯) ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,…………
    …….......’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,………
    …………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,_
    …………| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
  • adriantr, on 06/29/2008, -0/+16Just under half the women are left unhappy... does that not mean that over half are indeed happy?
    • Quicksilver4648, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2The glass in half full. Be optimistic.
  • RationalXubrnce, on 06/29/2008, -3/+9 Wait you mean the feminist jargon taught by lefty professors the last 40 years may not be accurate? I'm astonished!
    • Diggnabbit, on 06/29/2008, -2/+3What? There's nothing in the article that supports or refutes any particularly feminist stance. and there's certainly nothing about feminist "jargon."
      • RationalXubrnce, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1 I know I added that because if not for that influence no one would need to be told such an obvious fact of human nature.
  • cadavidf, on 06/29/2008, -3/+2Since the ***** sapiens and basically all primates have had this tendency. women want the best man to hookup with in order to have the best genes, but they want to have only one. the women wont want to sleep with a bunch of (say 20) losers just to be sleeping with one "alpha male." one night stands have no biological efficiency for them. On the other hand, the male don't care too much about the quality (they care but not as much) of their genes but the quantity of them and how spread they can get. if you think about it you'll know that's right. i could give you bibliography about this but is just as obvious as the research. :P
  • WhoDoneIt, on 06/29/2008, -1/+4Really, you needed a study to understand this?

    After the fact, you have the fear that you might have been given an STD, because guys tend to have more sexual partners than women overall. Fear of getting knocked up and left dealing with a child alone. Or ***** ridiculed that you are a slut because you had a one night stand.

    Men on the other hand get a high-five from their buddies for taking a fattie for the team while hammered out of their skull.
  • Dernit, on 06/29/2008, -2/+5Monogamy or even polygyny is beneficial to the male because it ensures that the offspring are his own, and he can provide for its survival. In chimpanzees, if a new male takes over a group, it's not unusual for him to slaughter all the young - to trigger estrus in the females and ensure he's not wasting his energy on other's offspring. Think about it before leaving your kid to a stepdaddy.

    Polygamy is beneficial to the female because she's getting the most genetic variety in her offspring. Some will have a better chance of survival. When a woman is ovulating, she'll be much more attracted to bigger, buffer men, than the joe schmoe provider she may have settled for. There's a reason for this.

    Unfortunately, the article is missing a discussion of cultural behaviors. In a male dominated society, of course we'll program women to feel shame over promiscuity - it reduces the security a male has in the knowledge that his children are actually of his genetic material... However, if you want to look at a female dominated society, check out bonobos. They have sex constantly, in a variety of positions with both sexes, with a lot less conflict. So you have to wonder if the human species took the right route.
  • CrypticSkeptic, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1this is basic undergraduate evolutionary psychology.
  • aelias, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1In other news, Ric Romero now works for the BBC.
  • funkyloki, on 06/29/2008, -2/+0the BBC is just as bad as any other MSM outlet. Look, they put one night stand in the title of an article that answers a question EVERYONE ALL READY KNOWS the answer too. Gee, men like sex, oh wow. And OMG, women feel unsatisfied after sex, there's a first, especially after a guy who probably doesn't give two ***** about them finishes rather quickly, he himself being fully satisfied. You do not need a college degree to see that coming.
    The other night I was watching PBS, and they have the BBC world news on in the evening for half an hour. The anchorperson had her shirt practically open and her ***** were just about falling out. I don't mind that, but does that have anything do to with reporting the news, or just to make people watch the *****. There is no news anymore, just infotainment paraded as news. Chaos, disaster, catastrophe, conflict and sex sell, and that is why we are always hearing about these things on our MSM stations.
    • theutopian, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Dugg down for comparing the BBC to the American Mainstream media. *****.
  • BillE3, on 06/29/2008, -2/+4So much for sex in the city protraying the one night stand party girl as being happy and fullfilled.
    • theutopian, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Actually if you watched the show, you would know that one night stands on the show were not very common. Most of the plots concerned the long term relationships the women had. Really, Samantha was the one night stand slut, and she's an aberration of a woman.
  • gryphon50, on 06/29/2008, -1/+0First of all, I've always thought that if a one night stand is indeed for one night, it must be dissatisfying to at least one party. If both people thought it was great, it wouldn't remain a one-night stand for long because they'd be back at it ASAP. My other thought on this is, men like to search for supposed biological reasons to justify own philandering and their expectation that women should stay monogamous. But in our closest evolutionary relatives (chimps), promiscuity seems pretty rampant. And also in hunter-gatherer societies, which have prevailed for most of human history, people are fairly promiscuous also (at least judging by modern examples of hunter-gatherers like the Kung or other tribes).
  • Misinformant, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2...reports the Ministry of Obvious *****.
  • Amadeus2490, on 06/29/2008, -1/+5I guess I must be the 5th guy; i've tried to enjoy one-night stands in the past, and there's just so much you don't understand about each others' bodies. . .I find it difficult or even impossible to relax and get off.

    Now, ***** are a different story. . .
  • Yanarix, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1evolution? pfah, hardly. society looks down on women who sleep around and praises men that do, hardly a surprise that men and women are aware of this and play their expected roles. biology has us geared to get our bone on daily, but society is still hung up on the now outdated sex= pregnancy thing.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.