Lumifer comments on Open thread, September 15-21, 2014 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: gjm 15 September 2014 12:24PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (339)

Sort By: Best

Show:

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 17 September 2014 04:00:06PM 5 points [-]

how many male companions they've had.

For hetero males the usual term for male companions is "close friends". I bet the great majority have some.

But go ask some hetero women whether they think sex and companionship are well-separable :-/

Comment author: Azathoth123 19 September 2014 03:37:26AM 6 points [-]

Also I get the feeling 21th century Americans have fewer close friends than the historical human norm.

Comment author: Lumifer 19 September 2014 05:33:37AM 2 points [-]

I don't know what the "historical human norm" is and I suspect there is a lot of variation there.

Comment author: Azathoth123 20 September 2014 08:02:41PM 3 points [-]

Try reading literature written before the past 50 years and preferably before the 20th century. That will give you an idea.

Comment author: Lumifer 21 September 2014 12:43:32AM 3 points [-]

Try reading literature written before the past 50 years and preferably before the 20th century.

I am afraid Victorian England is not all that representative of the historical human norm.

Comment author: Azathoth123 23 September 2014 03:22:47AM 4 points [-]

I wasn't primarily thinking of Victorian England. Also "before the 20th century" isn't just the 19th century.

Comment author: hyporational 17 September 2014 04:07:33PM * 2 points [-]

In Finnish the connotations of "companion" are more obviously sexual I see, at least in my circles.

Comment author: Lumifer 17 September 2014 04:16:24PM 3 points [-]

It's probably a language issue, in standard English the word "companion" has no sexual overtones.

More to the point, this subthread is explicitly about separating sex from companionship.