Slashdot Mirror
Monkeys Pay for Monkey Porn
An anonymous reader writes "Give a monkey some spending money, and he'll blow it on pictures of women monkeys. He'll also pay to see dominant monkeys. But you'll have to pay him to look at inferior monkeys. That's the upshot of a study out of Duke that was designed to explore the 'social machinery of the brain with an eye toward helping autism patients.' Next up -- seriously -- the researchers want to run the same test on Joe Sixpack (sans the monkey business)."
Watching sports is not a sexual behaviour, but rather a herd behaviour. It strengthens the bond to the "herd", in this case the followers of the same team. It also appeals to the competitive side of humans, since sports (usually? always?) are a competition. It's hardly a display of gay sexuality.
There's a subtle sexualisation of contact
The sexualisation happens in your head, dude. Physical contact is not inherently sexual, it's just christianity's fucked up relationship with sexuality that makes it so.
In many cultures it is perfectly natural to take someone by the hand to show them the way somewhere, even if both parties are adult males. Most americans would consider it "gay". Now what sort of mental condition and view of sexuality does that require?
Not that many other cultures don't have their own serious hangups, of course.
sudo ergo sum
Well, women look at pretty women as at dominant females. It is the same as posters of Jordans and Beckhams and who else in male teenagers' rooms.
But true, this is weird. While guys like to watch sportsmen and actors (dominant males) and women like to watch actors and models (for sexual reasons), magazines with female photos on the cover sell better - and AFAIK it has been proven. Men are allowed on covers only if accompanied by a woman or with a baby or, seldom, if they are really, really mega celebrities.
Raf