So there’s this girl named Zoe:
Who had a boyfriend:
And she cheated on her boyfriend with:
This wouldn’t be newsworthy, but apparently this chick wrote a flash game that got a lot of coverage in the press after Robin Williams’ suicide because the subject of this game was depression.
Hold on, as it turns out, one of the guys she was sleeping with was her boss. She was also sleeping with people who were writing reviews of her game.
It gets better. The femmesphere has rallied to her defense, saying that she is being unfairly attacked and her sexuality is her business.
Isn’t this the kind of ethical violation that people used to complain about, you know, sleeping to get ahead? Wasn’t feminism supposed to be against this sort of thing? So now it’s OK?
Here’s his blog:
And a thread on reddit:
Here’s a youtube video explaining things:
It gets worse. There are nudes.
Apropos of nothing, here’s a black girl dancing to a Katy Perry song in an Apple store. No racial or gender commentary here, I just thought it was funny. Pay particular attention to the Genius at time index 46 seconds. That’s me.
Not literally me, but that’s my face right now.
Apparently, there are hundreds of youtube videos of people dancing in the apple store. They’re hilarious. There’s also a Jezebel article about the phenomenon, which manages to take all the fun out of it as usual.
The Katy Perry song Peacock, if you move past the obvious sexual double-entendre, is about getting her guy to lose his shyness. The pick-up artist guys use the term in the exact same way. They call peacocking when you dress to stand out and get noticed. It’s also a part of overcoming social anxiety and not being afraid to dress for success.
Must have something to do with religion?
I was watching a youtube video recently about relationships, and the speaker made a comment about monogamy as it relates to testicular size. In the family great apes, the larger the testes the more promiscuous.
So, to my disbelief this morning I found myself Googling for pictures of orangutan balls. Apparently, orangutans are not highly sexually competitive. They tend to live fairly solitary lives, and the females do not mate with many males. As it turns out, their testes are small with respect to body weight.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, are chimps. They are a promiscuous species. The females may mate with many males. Male chimpanzees have large testes relative to body weight.
Humans, as it turns out are in-between chimps and orangutans. Our testes are larger as a percent of body weight than orangutans, but smaller than those of chimps.
I don’t think I need to include a picture of some guy’s balls.
This is interesting compared with another post I made a while back about how promiscuity is related to sexual dimorphism.
In all three cases (humans, chimps, orangs) there exist sexually dimorphic traits. Males are larger in all species. Like human males, male orangs grow beards. They also have those funny face pads. I don’t believe any of these three species mates for life. This sexual differentiation may be a function of the social organization on a spectrum from solitary to social.