Cittasanto wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:01 pmthe op does not deal with that, as the situation as presented only indicates a discussion has been had between the two. That is up to those involved to consider.
There are obviously potentially three people involved here, rather than two, unless they discussed the following:
Cittasanto wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:34 pm The Buddha could have made having multiple partners at the same time a breach of the precept for men, but didn't.
The precept was given together with other Buddhist practises, such as marrying of children, particularly daughters, when they came of age (DN 31). Thus the precept refers to daughters "protected by their family". To cite the precept without reference to the other teachings about family is obviously not the totality of the Dhamma. Similar to Gotama & his followers mentioned in the suttas, most people in the Buddha's society were married as teenagers, when they became sexually mature. To quote AN 4.55:
Nakula's father said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since Nakula's mother as a young girl was brought to me [to be my wife] when I was just a young boy, I am not conscious of being unfaithful to her even in mind, much less in body... Nakula's mother said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since I as a young girl was brought to Nakula's father [to be his wife] when he was just a young boy, I am not conscious of being unfaithful to him even in mind, much less in body. We want to see one another not only in the present life but also in the life to come.
AN 4.55
Cittasanto wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:34 pmWe are dealing with a current time situation regarding Buddhist precepts.
My impression is you might not understand what the precepts actually are; as I just suggested.
Cittasanto wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:34 pmthe OP talks about biological needs (the desire to reproduce could be called that), hence the situation presented by myself above is a potential. The third party is not even being considered in the op as it is not at that stage. that would be upto the couple.
The OP is obviously referring to having male orgasms but it is you that seeks to create a wholesome veneer by mentioning reproduction. If the man wants to reproduce, he can hire a surrogate mother in a formal businesslike arrangement.
Cittasanto wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:34 pmNo 3rd person discussed
If there is no 3rd person, how could the husband & wife discuss having sex with a 3rd person, unless they were discussing rupa khandha below:
Cittasanto wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:34 pm you seam to think it would not be a mutually benefiscial situation for all involved.
This statement is obviously wrong view in Buddhism; in that you assert an action motivated solely by sexual lust is "beneficial" according to Buddhism. Clearly what you have posted here is completely the opposite of the literal Buddhist teachings.
User1249x wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:10 pmActually there are statistics showing that in general top 80% of women are having sex with top 20% of men. There are also studies that would support the notion that the men who are not in the top 20% are generally perceived as "below average" by women.
Sounds like non-sense to me. Regardless, as said before, the ways of the world of puthujjana are not the ways of Dhamma.
User1249x wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:10 pmWith the notion of hypergamy taken into consideration it is hardly surprising that women would have to compete a lot and would have to share.
The statistics you are referring to sounds like the promiscuous world of gold-digging swingers. Have you been watching those MGTOW videos? Most women are married to a husband or have a stable partner.
As of 2006, 55.7% of Americans age 18 and over were married. Then there are those in committed relationships. The 80% women chasing 20% of the men you are referring to would be the hungry ghost ladies desperately chasing anything that shows an interest in them, i.e., the male predators.
User1249x wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:10 pmTo make matters worse it would be mentioned that women who failed to make the switch would have been killed and thus human females have been breeded for this trait of non-attachment.
This is obviously wrong. Females often have conflicting emotions thus, while they might possibly have a trait of adaptability, their primary dhammic trait is fidelity, as the Buddha taught in AN 6.52. While you are free to be a non-Buddhist and take refuge in science, the Buddha taught differently in AN 6.52. Women obviously primarily have a trait to maintain their families for the sake of the survival of their children (but then, as a last resort, may be able to adapt, when circumstances change drastically, such as in times of war or having a loser of a husband devoid of dhamma).