Reddit reviews Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn
We found 13 Reddit comments about Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
Used Book in Good Condition
And Sex at Dawn is probably wrong, or at least mis-represents research. See:
Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn.
The myth of promiscuity: A review of Lynn Saxon, Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn.
The Human That Never Evolved.
My own review, which is less thorough than those linked to above. Notice that Christopher Ryan shows up in the comments section.
If you want to know about evolutionary biology / psychology, read The Evolution of Childhood and follow some of its research citations.
If you don't follow the evolutionary biology and psychology research, it's easy to be snookered by Sex at Dawn and confirmation bias. Don't be that person.
Sex At Dawn is pseudoscience bullshit written with a personal agenda. The authors are intentionally deceitful, took quotes out of context and purposefully ignored data and studies that contradict their polyamorous fantasies. I too thought it was good until I was corrected with this book:
Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn
As someone who read and loved this book and proceeded to talk to everyone I met about how great it was and how everyone should read it, I really have to recommend you all read Sex at Dusk - Lynn Saxon.
It has helped give me a much better, more scientifically informed perspective of the whole Human Sexuality thing.
I still recommend Sex at Dawn, but only as a stepping stone to Sex at Dusk. Because fully informed is always better than selectively informed.
You should read Sex at Dusk. It's a really well writen, well researched book deconstructing the polygamy/free love argument put forward in Sex at Dawn.
Heres something just as good
Human hunter gatherers did not evolve in some sexual egalitarian utopia. Most likely, they were just as plagued with jealousy and rape as our modern society, if not moreso
It doesn't actually challenge the “standard narrative” – and that's part of why it's a fraud. What Ryan calls the “standard narrative” is a strawman that he invented. It's an unrecognizable fiction that does NOT represent the consensus in the field. It's much closer to some right-wing fundamentalist idea of human evolution, and everyone knows it's crap.
But it suits Ryan to create this papier-mâché enemy so he can portray himself as a bold revolutionary, slaying an imaginary dragon. Don't buy his self-promotional narrative. It's a crock.
The criticism of the book has nothing to do with it "challenging" anything, and everything to do with it being a dishonest book from top to bottom, completely misrepresenting the views and the work of leading scientists in the field. Ryan repeatedly misquotes and distorts serious research and makes claims unsupported by the evidence.
The response to the book has nothing to do with it being pro- or anti-monogamy. It's simply bad science and dishonest writing.
Read Sex at Dusk. Instead of twisting everything to support a simple, preconceived answer the way Ryan does, Saxon gets the science right, in all its complexity. It's a much better and more interesting book as a result.
> "Human sexuality has always been politicized, prettified, sanitized, romanticized and mythologized. For adults for whom truth is the ultimate turn-on, I recommend Lynn Saxon's insightful treatment of this eternally fascinating subject." – Steven Pinker, Harvard College Professor of Psychology, Harvard University
Sorry for not responding earlier, but I'm in a different time zone, and it was very late yesterday.
The linked review is about the book behind the TED talk, called "Sex at Dawn", and another book critically checking its claims, called "Sex at Dusk".
If one can summarize the points of the critic, it's probably that the main thesis of "Sex at Dawn" runs contrary to much of what we currently know about evolution in general, and the evolution of humans in particular.
> Dr. Christopher Ryan
It should be noted that he promotes pseudo-science and is not a respected academic. His credentials are also disputed. I'd recommend reading Sex at Dusk which uses the same sources he cites to argue against the claims put forth in his book.
If you read "Sex at dawn" you may want to read
"Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn" by Lynn Saxon
which explains some of the pseudo-science and misinformation in "Sex at Dawn". Warning: it is fairly dense and less for the popular audience, but worth the effort.
http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dusk-Lifting-Shiny-Wrapping/dp/1477697284/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1396916363&sr=8-1&keywords=sex+at+dusk
http://yourbrainonporn.com/guys-where-do-you-fall-on-the-monogamy-spectrum
BTW, there's an entire book gutting Chris Ryan's views: http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dusk-Lifting-Shiny-Wrapping/dp/1477697284 His minions have been doing their best to trash it, but the research supports his critics, not him.
http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dusk-Lifting-Shiny-Wrapping/dp/1477697284
Lots of sources here:
https://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dusk-Lifting-Shiny-Wrapping/dp/1477697284
Most interesting from here:
http://www.cengage.com/c/the-canela-kinship-ritual-and-sex-in-an-amazonian-tribe-2e-crocker/9780534174910
—They don't even identify with the concept of "orgasm." They were unaware of it. Sex lasts a few seconds.
Sex is mostly culture, not biology. That's my point.