When there is a pack of dogs or wolves there always arises a dominant male or female ie alpha male or alpha female…it is called the pecking order. The Pecking order is settled by fights between dogs or wolves who feel up to the challenge. It has nothing to do with sex it has to do with control.

In the dog world, dogs come in heat every 6 months; for wolfs it is once a year. The time between breeding cycles has nothing to do with sex it has to do with behaving in the pack. In the wild it has to do with who gets fed first or not at all or who gets the scraps left on a carcass. 

I used to raise Huskies.

Richard Haden

---

From: FM <freemodulation-AT-gmail.com">freemodulation-AT-gmail.com>
To: Discussions of situationist theory <situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org">situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org>
Sent: Wed, August 25, 2010 2:07:12 PM
Subject: Re: sex/violence (Laurie Colson)

Definitely

My friends have 4 dogs, 3 females (grandma, mother, daughter) and a male (grandpa) living all together. The females regularly hump one each other in order to set a kind of dominance.

This make think of another aspect that we can observe among animals, something that is related to the association violence/copulation: did you ever witness a sexual intercourse between cats? I am sure you did. Isn't that vehemence scary somehow? Yes it is. But can we consider it a perversion? Where is the bound «entre nature et contre nature»?

—

FM

Il giorno 25/ago/2010, alle ore 19.29, Laurie Colson ha scritto:

I'm pretty sure that when my dog humps my leg, it is to establish dominance, not because she thinks I'm hot. (I've *almost* established dominance with her!) 

---

From: FM <freemodulation-AT-gmail.com">freemodulation-AT-gmail.com>
To: Discussions of situationist theory <situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org">situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org>
Sent: Tue, August 24, 2010 7:44:57 AM
Subject: Re: pornography (Drake)

Drake it is so clear that she is not here for communication…

Btw yes we live in an era where we have evolved that far to take it up as a subject outside of unrequited acceptance.

I do suspect that somewhere, in women and men (might it be within some plies of the dna?), there's an encrypted code which unfortunately associates violence with sexual intercourse since ever. Due to physical predominance, men have exerted their abuse on women for thousands years, and this Hýbris gradually turned into social rules and regulations. On the other hand, many ethnologists had discovered that there are several societies in which women seem to be socially dominant and the community bears no sign of that male embezzlement. We have evolved so far but many people still cannot dissociate copulation from vehemence. Women included.

—

FM

Il giorno 24/ago/2010, alle ore 13.14, R Drake Ewbank ha scritto:

On 8/23/2010 5:41 PM, Vikki Riley wrote:

Drake,

You too seem to have not read Dworkin's work.

Sad.

Vikki

Vikki,

If you didn't understand what I said, then I am glad that at least you apparently understand what she said.

If the premise that the very physical nature of sex and how it is accomplished cannot help except end up engendering exploitation or violence in a way that is unavoidably physiologically determined, then I believe that my last paragraph in my post is actually consistent with some of the published work of Dworkin.

It is actually a large problem as we less and less accept the biological or social role and reason it out, and is only made discussable because we live in an era where we have evolved that far to take it up as a subject outside of unrequited acceptance, thus my allegory of wading into a pond of ice at the beginning of my first post on this.

Also the discarding the notion of ownership, duality, and possession as the basis for the western tradition in relationships and social morality. Stoltenberg, without elaborating, deals with this in his comment about his marriage to her.  It is a progressive view and I thought it an interesting, telling, and even sentimental comment, which is why I quoted it.

Much as James Joyce's wife, Nora, when asked why she did not have a Catholic funeral for him, said, 'I could not do that to him…'

Vikki, though I realise that it may be a departure in style on the list, it would be honestly appreciated to receive something that is not wed to some ad hominem component, or, I guess, disregard this request if it is in your nature to think that is in the nature of this.

drake