It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chimpanzee vs Bonobo - Which team are you on?

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
My point here is that we are not "like" either Pan type, but we span the same range of variation they do. If Pan migrated as we do, the deep clading of the two types wouldn't be as obvious.

Further - you are very attached to adding human traits ontop of chimpanzees. The "loving" or "warlike" behaviour who are describing is your own view of it.

[edit on 2010/5/19 by Aeons]


Yes, that is why i made this post. I am personifying the two species because they are culturally different and physically different. The bonobos have pinkish lips which the common chimpanzees do not.

I know humans are not like one of the groups as a whole, but individually our personalities can match one of the chimps more. I am trying to point out that humans don't have to be fighters, we can be lovers, just like certain chimpanzees have chose to do.

Are you denying that the bonobos are more loving than the common chimpanzees? If you are, you have not studied either group enough to make those claims. I have invested countless hours researching these groups. Are you also denying that the common chimpanzee males are not more warrior like and "tougher" than the bonobos?

I know that Bonobos have been observed hunting, but it is not something they do as often as the common chimpanzees, atleast that has been reported. In a 5 year study they observed a group of bonobos hunting monkeys 5 times with 3 successful kills. But the interesting thing about the hunts are that women were involved, which the common chimpanzees don't do.

www.livescience.com...


The researchers have seen three instances of successful hunts in which bonobos captured and ate their primate prey. In two other cases, the bonobo hunting attempts failed. The data from LuiKotale showed that both bonobo sexes play active roles in pursuing and hunting monkeys. The involvement of adult females in the hunts (which is not seen in chimps) may reflect social patterns such as alliance formation and cooperation among adult females, they said.




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   


Gorilla smash little monkeys!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Bonobos also rarely ejaculate yet they're always having sex. They only ejaculate for procreation. They know the Daoist/Tantric secret of the internal climax, or non-ejaculatory orgasm. This is different from traditional violent forms of orgasm whereby in many males it can overstimulate the stress response system. The internal climax stimulates the vagus nerve, and the vagus nerve is where oxytocin is produced, and real feelings of love, etc. Not like ejaculatory orgasm which depletes dopamine and oxytocin in a huge drop which follows from a sharp rise of these during the short sputter of ejaculatory orgasm. Heck many guys don't even have a Real orgasm when they have sex, they just go for the ejaculation and think that is an orgasm.

Internal alchemy and transmutation/sublimation is performed through the internal climax. Do you think this may also be a key to their peaceful nature?

Transforming pent up anger and more violent emotions into more peaceful nurturing types and love, into creativity.

They know karezza.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by The Quiet Storm]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
Unless they are the secret ingredient of a Iron Chef cook-off. It doesn't make a diff to me.

So, I guess I would fall on the chimp side.



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Quiet Storm
Bonobos also rarely ejaculate yet they're always having sex. They only ejaculate for procreation. They know the Daoist/Tantric secret of the internal climax, or non-ejaculatory orgasm. This is different from traditional violent forms of orgasm whereby in many males it can overstimulate the stress response system. The internal climax stimulates the vagus nerve, and the vagus nerve is where oxytocin is produced, and real feelings of love, etc. Not like ejaculatory orgasm which depletes dopamine and oxytocin in a huge drop which follows from a sharp rise of these during the short sputter of ejaculatory orgasm. Heck many guys don't even have a Real orgasm when they have sex, they just go for the ejaculation and think that is an orgasm.

Internal alchemy and transmutation/sublimation is performed through the internal climax. Do you think this may also be a key to their peaceful nature?

Transforming pent up anger and more violent emotions into more peaceful nurturing types and love, into creativity.

They know karezza.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by The Quiet Storm]


If this is true, my friend, you have made the best post EVER! If bonobos really do tantric sex that would be the greatest thing in the world. I will have to look into this! Thank you for your post!


Originally posted by jacksmoke
Unless they are the secret ingredient of a Iron Chef cook-off. It doesn't make a diff to me.

So, I guess I would fall on the chimp side.



As for this post.. yep.. you would be a common chimpanzee, congratulations!



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
"If this is true, my friend, you have made the best post EVER! If bonobos really do tantric sex that would be the greatest thing in the world. I will have to look into this! Thank you for your post!"

I know my post was crude, slightly disturbing humor.

But if you are fascinated but the thought of tantric bonobo sex, your are way more disturbed than I.

Good luck with your fetish, I am sure you can find some bonobo tantric sex on the web somewhere.

BTW, I am just giving you a hard time. jk



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by jacksmoke
 


I don't see how anyone could not be fascinated with bonobo tantric sex. Unless one is religious and does not believe we evolved from similar apes then i can understand one not being interested in this.

Your lucky i was feeling nice and only called you a common chimpanzee :-D 143



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I mean think of it. today's society is obsessed with anger-fear-war based sexuality.

The bonobos... are not. They solve all tensions with sex. Therefore, they transmute sexual aggression into more creative and productive purposes. Most of these tensions are rooted in some way in lust.

All passions are rooted in sexuality. At least in a sexual being.

Think of the territorial wars, and hoarding resources. Why? They want to carry on a legacy.

Don't think of it as simple physical sex but think of replication in general. Replication of anything. Carrying on one's legacy, offspring, etc. Resources are obviously needed for the ever present needs of an expanding society (ie through procreation). People in today's world, just keep procreating and procreating and not thinking of resources, nor the reality of a cruel society not being very suitable for raising offspring, yet we just keep procreating until we are overpopulated. Then wars come. Genetic impurities arise, or inbreds because people have so many children related to each other , and they dont know who's the parents (promiscuity) and what do you know, it turns out you might be doing a distant cousin, which also keeps us genetically divided ie, in seperate races where we have huge populations of different races when we should be more mixed. Of course, but not mixing for no reason you dont want genetic impurities.

ok, maybe with the above some might disagree. I'm just against needless mixing, and promiscuity, and more about equality of the sexes (among those that are "deserving"). Uhm... I might get a lot of flack but oh well. I'm also a very sensitive person right now..

[edit on 20-5-2010 by The Quiet Storm]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


Whatever floats your boat.

I prefer the mating habits of Tazmanian Devils. Reminds me of my wife.

You can call me whatever kind of chimp you want, common or otherwise.




posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by The Quiet Storm
 


Equating penis and ejaculation with violence is cultural bit of human retardness, which in no way actually represents what a penis or semen does or is.

Nor are all passions rooted in sex.

Nor is sex more creative (consider the innumerable inventive ways we come up with to kill that should seem obvious.

Nor is the use of sex to subsume violence a good idea. Nor is it indicative of a lack of violence.

Your children upset? Jack them off. That's a good idea. Its a good use of stress response. Oh wait....no it isn't.

[edit on 2010/5/20 by Aeons]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I'm not talking about just the physical aspect of replication.

And also, I'm not saying that physical sex is the most creative. i'm just saying that for a lot of males, we have evolved to make sex pretty much the only reason for being motivated for a lot of things. and also that a lot of aggression is based on lust or sexual frustrations.


[edit on 20-5-2010 by The Quiet Storm]



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Beastmaster,

Kudos for the excellent thread and OP. I have long been fascinated by the way chimps and bonobos have evolved different social characteristics and behaviors. But some of it appears to be physical too, like the longer period of sexual receptivity the female bonobos have.

The way I see it there's a happy medium between love and war. If a species is so busy copulating all the time that they don't defend their territory and food source, they may not survive. You can't assume that just because you're peaceful, everyone else will be. So too much love can be bad.

And being obsessed with conquering more territory is obviously bad, so too much war is bad.

So in my view the right amount of war would be to have the ability to defend your territory when attacked. Beyond that there's no need for more war genetically at least. (Though I think some of the human wars are economic). And love is good, who can complain about that. The chimps could use more of it, apparently.



Originally posted by Aeons
The difference in their genetic make up is not 20%. The degree of variation between human and chimp is just over 1%.

www.pnas.org...


You say just over 1% but your source says 5% including the indels. Or are you not including the indels and why not?



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 

Bonobo...

Thanks for all the links. I will watch them all...

oh, ah... oooh haaa, hee, hoooooo... ha, hah, Hah!



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:58 PM
link   
I think everyone has the cause and effect TOTALLY backwards.

The one culture is male dominated, war-like, and aggressive because, as the OP says quite clearly, they live in an area where there is extreme competition for food by other primates. In order to survive, they HAVE to be aggressive, warlike, and violent. Because of this need, males naturally take over as leaders, as they are better at such things.

The other culture lives an easy life by example. No competition from other primates, so they can relax, screw around, and have fun all the time. They don't have as much of a need for violence and aggressive behavior because they aren't being challenged by other larger primates. So females are in charge and society is more peaceful and caring.

But you all assigned the human cultural idea that the male is the CAUSE of the warlike society. It isn't. Environment dictates whether you can survive by being violent or survive by being peaceful. Just like when society falls apart and violence takes a foot hold. It's because resources nearly disappear, there is very strong competition, so violence and war must be utilized in order to survive.

If the "peaceful" ones went north, and had to compete with larger primates for survival, odds are they would either die off, or realize they must wage war and commit violence to survive in that environment.

So as you can see, blaming males for violence and war is pointless and dishonest. Male dominated society is an EFFECT not a CAUSE of the need for violence to survive.

The only other option is to have everyone work together in order to survive a harsh environment. But, the catch here is that you cannot FORCE everyone to work together. Doing so would be just as violent and aggressive as a violent warlike society. Peace enforced through violence is not peace, it's a facade.

I hope people are understanding what I'm saying, because it's really quite obvious. Males taking over, and violent aggressive society is a result of a harsh environment with lots of competition. Females taking over, and a peaceful loving society is a result of an easy life with little to no competition. Which is why America is becoming so feminized today. People are weak because they have it so good. When things fall apart (they always do) the chimps of society will slaughter the bonnabos and survive, such is the way of the world.

But the bottom line, males don't make a society violent, and females don't make it peaceful. Environment dictates the type of society that is most able to survive in that particular environment. If it's harsh, unforgiving, and rife with competition, society will reflect that. If it's easy, forgiving, bountiful with little competition, society will reflect that too.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join