discussion NTR is not a dream, its a nightmare. Just say NO to NTR!

[Crpapjda]

Hi Doc.
Your question is "this behavior is an evolutionary trait", right?
Then we have to consider the 2 possibilities: 1) NTR is an evolutionary trait, or 2) is a social construct
1) I believe that you are familiar with the "selfish gene" model. Given that this theory was discarded on the basis that is not the individual that HAS to pass on the genes, but the population that has to perpetuate the gene pool, you can discard the idea of NTR being something "completely 100% of the cases" unnatural. You can see many of this examples in nature, like on the "helpers" in birds. Individuals that don't reproduce, or relegate reproductive task, but improve the overall fitness of their communities by helping on the care of the younglings. Not all species do it this way. It's just a different strategy. Being humans a social species, it wouldn't be that weird to think of NTR like some sort of mechanism to ensure engagement between all the persons involve. Human behavior is complex, and often instinct and emotion mix in weird ways.

2) Societies evolve and more complex behaviors or interactions appear. You can check if in other cultures, or in past times, NTR was a thing that people practice or even were aware of. Im lacking knowledge in this subject, so Im not going to elaborate here (not an anthropologist or a sociologist). I THINK that some cultures are more into NTR than others.

What I CAN give my opinion is in experiment design. A survey wont tell you if its one or the other. Making experiments to asses behavior in humans is always a tricky task, and often controversial . What you would get here is a focus group with a VERY strong bias. Even if the people here answer with the utmost sincerity, you would get a biased conclusion.
IF the original question is about an evolutionary trait, I recommend to search for investigation on primates first (if there is any paper about bonobos and NTR, e.g.) and then move to human examples

 

[doctorpinch]

Well, it looks like my thread was merged with the general NTR thread. I think this is unfortunate, because the focus of my interest is actually not NTR as such. NTR is one of the side-kinks that I think is affected by evolution, but isn't the core issue I want to test. Maybe I'll ping the mods to see if this discussion can be moved to an "evolution of kinks" thread.

 

[doctorpinch]

Hi Doc.
Your question is "this behavior is an evolutionary trait", right?
Then we have to consider the 2 possibilities: 1) NTR is an evolutionary trait, or 2) is a social construct
1) I believe that you are familiar with the "selfish gene" model. Given that this theory was discarded on the basis that is not the individual that HAS to pass on the genes, but the population that has to perpetuate the gene pool, you can discard the idea of NTR being something "completely 100% of the cases" unnatural. You can see many of this examples in nature, like on the "helpers" in birds. Individuals that don't reproduce, or relegate reproductive task, but improve the overall fitness of their communities by helping on the care of the younglings. Not all species do it this way. It's just a different strategy. Being humans a social species, it wouldn't be that weird to think of NTR like some sort of mechanism to ensure engagement between all the persons involve. Human behavior is complex, and often instinct and emotion mix in weird ways.

2) Societies evolve and more complex behaviors or interactions appear. You can check if in other cultures, or in past times, NTR was a thing that people practice or even were aware of. Im lacking knowledge in this subject, so Im not going to elaborate here (not an anthropologist or a sociologist). I THINK that some cultures are more into NTR than others.

What I CAN give my opinion is in experiment design. A survey wont tell you if its one or the other. Making experiments to asses behavior in humans is always a tricky task, and often controversial . What you would get here is a focus group with a VERY strong bias. Even if the people here answer with the utmost sincerity, you would get a biased conclusion.
IF the original question is about an evolutionary trait, I recommend to search for investigation on primates first (if there is any paper about bonobos and NTR, e.g.) and then move to human examples

A couple of thoughts on this.

First, I don't think evolutionary trait and social construct is an either-or. Social constructs can be the subject of selection, just as genetic traits can be. The real question is whether the trait is heritable. A social construct can be heritable, and if it is, then it can be under selection pressure.

Second, I agree with you, Crpapjda, that there are strong parallels between the evolutionary answer to the problem of altruism and the evolutionary answer to the problems of many of the kinks that we're talking about here (including, maybe most interestingly, male homosexuality).

Third, I'm not sure I agree with you that societies "evolve" in the sense that you seem to be using the word in your point 2. If you mean (as I think you do) that societies "advance" in context of evolution, I think that, too, is a discarded notion. It is the case that societies advance in a technological sense. And the speed of change is clearly accelerating. However, I think societies, like populations, are "fit for purpose". That is, they are well suited to the environment. As the environment changes, populations (and maybe societies) change (i.e., "evolve") in response to those environmental changes. But I don't think it's fair to characterize a latter iteration of a population (or a society) as more or less "advanced". They've just changed in response to a changing environment.

I have got to get this survey posted so that we're not talking into the ether, but have a real work in progress to discuss (and work on). I'll get cracking....

 

[User_111233]

strangely i don't mind it as much in comix, but avoid it as the plague in games.
Something to do with identifying as the MC i guess.

Also don't mind if girls do it.
Maybe it's just a one dick policy.

 

[Crpapjda]

A couple of thoughts on this.

First, I don't think evolutionary trait and social construct is an either-or. Social constructs can be the subject of selection, just as genetic traits can be. The real question is whether the trait is heritable. A social construct can be heritable, and if it is, then it can be under selection pressure.

Second, I agree with you, Crpapjda, that there are strong parallels between the evolutionary answer to the problem of altruism and the evolutionary answer to the problems of many of the kinks that we're talking about here (including, maybe most interestingly, male homosexuality).

Third, I'm not sure I agree with you that societies "evolve" in the sense that you seem to be using the word in your point 2. If you mean (as I think you do) that societies "advance" in context of evolution, I think that, too, is a discarded notion. It is the case that societies advance in a technological sense. And the speed of change is clearly accelerating. However, I think societies, like populations, are "fit for purpose". That is, they are well suited to the environment. As the environment changes, populations (and maybe societies) change (i.e., "evolve") in response to those environmental changes. But I don't think it's fair to characterize a latter iteration of a population (or a society) as more or less "advanced". They've just changed in response to a changing environment.

I have got to get this survey posted so that we're not talking into the ether, but have a real work in progress to discuss (and work on). I'll get cracking....

I think that social traits are learned. Behavior is heritable if it has an heritable component to it. Social traits/constructs can be subject to selection, I agree and can think of some examples of that, but are "learn", not inherited. If you take an infant individual and move it from an NTR place to a place were NTR is non-existent, would the individual develop it anyway? But also you are right. is not an "or" only question, unless we are talking strictly in evolutionary terms. We can have both things at the same time, a "cultural NTR" an a "genetic NTR".
You asked for an "evolutionary" meaning to NTR, so I thought my answer in evolutionary terms. If that wasn't on the scope of the OP, please disregard that part.

I said that societies "evolve" in like "change and grow more complex", not in a evolutionary way. I would never use "advance" or "advanced" in relation to evolution, I even hesitate in using the word "fit". I agree that societies are more suited to certain condition/environment/change. Maybe it was poorly worded of my behalf.

Also.... Am I having a fever dream? weren't we in another thread??? Was your thread nuked?

 

[doctorpinch]

I think that social traits are learned. Behavior is heritable if it has an heritable component to it. Social traits/constructs can be subject to selection, I agree and can think of some examples of that, but are "learn", not inherited. If you take an infant individual and move it from an NTR place to a place were NTR is non-existent, would the individual develop it anyway? But also you are right. is not an "or" only question, unless we are talking strictly in evolutionary terms. We can have both things at the same time, a "cultural NTR" an a "genetic NTR".
You asked for an "evolutionary" meaning to NTR, so I thought my answer in evolutionary terms. If that wasn't on the scope of the OP, please disregard that part.

I said that societies "evolve" in like "change and grow more complex", not in a evolutionary way. I would never use "advance" or "advanced" in relation to evolution, I even hesitate in using the word "fit". I agree that societies are more suited to certain condition/environment/change. Maybe it was poorly worded of my behalf.

Also.... Am I having a fever dream? weren't we in another thread??? Was your thread nuked?

I think my thread was less "nuked" as redirected. I'm hoping we can re-establish it as a separate thread just related to kinks and evolution, but I think the mods want to have a say in that and see what the scope of the discussion is/will be.

It's a little weird to be in a shared fever dream, but I guess it is what it is....

 

[Crpapjda]

I think my thread was less "nuked" as redirected. I'm hoping we can re-establish it as a separate thread just related to kinks and evolution, but I think the mods want to have a say in that and see what the scope of the discussion is/will be.

It's a little weird to be in a shared fever dream, but I guess it is what it is....

It makes even less sense, this thread is completely different topic.

Eeey, if you can prove a shared hallucination, you are on your way to a Nobel

 

[InvaderZim]

However much one feel drowned in futa and NTR, I guess it could be worse.
Going by my casual observation of titles scrolling by, I could have been gay and not into furries. Talk about slim pickings.

 

[hoju]

solo for me.
The girls are MINE!!!

 

[Ribaso]

I could have been gay and not into furries.

That's a unicorn.

 

[misaki002]

Sharing is just getting cucked so gard NO for me. The only right way for me is solo male protag with harem.

 

[dehydrateddonburi]

Soloooo. All the way.

 

[Djehuty]

For love interests and the kind of stories that are most common, I prefer solo. But give me a good corruption game with a bastard mofo mc where love is nowhere to be found, and I'll happily share them with background characters.

 

[Nekura0ne]

I'm all for solo harems. These games are supposed to be fantasy and in my fantasy I wants all the girls.

 

[InvaderZim]

See, what do I know, not being gay and all.

 

[Republican Bear]

Well meme time enjoy your nightmares.

You must be registered to see attachments

You must be registered to see attachments

 

[Ribaso]

Well meme time enjoy your nightmares.

You must be registered to see attachments

You must be registered to see attachments

 

[fromabove]

Netori is lowkey based. I very much enjoy the fantasy of stealing someone else's wife.

"NTR" is a stupid acronym because it can technically mean either netori or netorare, two very different things that appeal to very different people. I wish people would stop using it.

 

[therealdoctor1]

I don't mind it as long as it's me having sex with someone gf not the other way around

 

[fromabove]

Also, I roll my eyes every time I see games with a promiscuous female MC being advertised as "NTR"/"netorare". Unless her boyfriend/husband cheated on her despite her being loyal, that tag is categorically incorrect.

Yes, Inceton NTR division, I'm looking at you.