= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
OrphanWilde comments on What if "status" IS a terminal value for most people? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (111)
"No sex before marriage" could make casual dating less expensive, meaning you're more likely to find somebody more compatible with you. Polyamory is of course another solution, but is socially expensive.
Why would "not having sex" make dating cheaper?
I'd think that would be an example of "trading status to gain sex", so presumably the opposite is true of refusing this option. So we seem to be in agreement there at least...
Socially expensive, not financially expensive; it's kind of theoretic either way, because if we posit a society in which "No sex before marriage" is the standard, we might as well posit a society in which polyamory is the standard, but in the case of such a society, there would be less resistance to casual dating.
That seems an unfair comparison, since, as far as I know, there actually ARE quite a few examples of that, both historically and currently. I'm not aware of anywhere near the same level of polyamory-as-standard (it generally seems to be polygamy or some other variant where high status earns you additional mates, rather than the "Bay Area" style of simply dating multiple people)