I’m going to have to put the kibosh on these damn puns, aren’t I? Yes. Yes, indeed. Sometimes, though, they seem to just write themselves. I’m taking another step back from the Bow-mentum as I already got stoked on a tie this week, and also because I decided to totally ruin the promise of wearing my new bow (pictured) from Rugby to the holiday party next week and instead wear it today. I may just have to go forth with the Giles tie sooner than expected. I hope Pierrepont’s shipping is muy rapido as that party is creeping up fast. It seems like it was just yesterday that i was beginning to plan it. And by yesterday, I of course mean early November. And here we are…December. Come on. Really?

Lil tigers on there....

Speaking of holiday parties and all things plaid and festive, I have been looking for a good pair of pants to wear for this event and just around in general during this season. Bonobos has a few select pairs perfect for the occasion, but what gets me the most is the names the company slapped on their limited edition Pendleton wools. Panta Claus and Legnogs warrant buying these alone, despite the fact that I am currently saving money to finish up the holiday shopping. What I am trying to say is next year I may be swimming in it more and would probably snag a pair of these.

So a friend of a friend of a friend wrote this article about bats having oral sex… . Its for real.

Many humans whine about not getting oral sex often enough, but for most animals, it’s completely non-existent. In fact, we know of only animal apart from humans to regularly engage in fellatio – the short-nosed fruit bat (Cynopterus sphinx).

[some tunes to set the mood...]

The bat’s sexual antics have only just been recorded by Min Tan of China’s Guangdong Entomological Institute (who are either branching out, or are confused about entomology). Tan captured 60 wild bats from a nearby park, housed them in pairs of the opposite sex and voyeuristically filmed their liaisons using a night-time camera. Twenty of the bats got busy, and their exploits were all caught on video.

Male bats create tents by biting leaves until they fall into shape. These provide shelter and double as harems, each housing several females who the male mates with. Fruit bat sex goes like this: the female approaches and sniffs the male, and both partners start to lick one another. The male makes approaches with his thumbs (like the Fonz) and mounts the female (like the Fonz). Sex itself is the typical rhythmic thrusting that we’re used to, and afterwards, the male licks his own penis for several seconds.

But Tan also found that female bat will often bend down to lick the shaft of her mate’s penis during sex itself. This behaviour happened on 70% of the videos, making it the only known example of regular fellatio in a non-human animal. It also prolonged the sexual encounter – males never withdrew their penises when they were being licked and, on average, the behaviour bought the couple an extra 100 seconds of sex over and above the usual 2 minutes. The licking itself only lasted for 20 seconds on average, so each second of it buys six extra seconds of penetration.

NSFW – short-nosed fruit bats having sex. I will have you know that the music choice came with the video and has nothing to do with me.

Oral sex is rare in other animals. Bonobos do it (but really, what don’t they do?) but it’s more of a form of play among young males, and there’s one anecdotal instance of an orang-utan doing the same. Some animals, such as ring-tailed lemurs, lick each other’s genitals to judge whether they’re ready for mating, but there’s no evidence that they do so as an actual part of sex. As for other bats, it’s entirely possible that they too engage in oral sex. However, given their inaccessible roosts and nocturnal habits, we’re largely in their dark about their sex lives.

Nonetheless, Tan suggests a few possible reasons for the short-nosed fruit bat’s penchant for fellatio, aside from the anthropocentric conclusion of ‘pleasure-giving’. Bat penises contain erectile tissue much like our own. It gets stiffer if it’s stimulated, so females could use oral sex to prolong their encounters with males, by maintain their erections or lubricating it for easier entry.

While many of us might nod sagely at the need for longer sex, Tan suggests that for the bats, it could mean easier transport of sperm to the oviduct, or more secretions from the female that are conducive to fertilisation. It could also be a way of hogging a mate, keeping him away from rival females.

Alternatively, the antiseptic properties of saliva might help to strip the male’s penis of bacteria or fungi, and prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. The fact that males lick their own penises after sex supports this idea.

And finally, oral sex might help females to pick up chemical traces on her mate that might suggest if he’s a suitable mate. Obviously, they’d already be having sex, but female mammals often exert choice over their sexual partners after the fact, rejecting sperm from inferior males, or encouraging congress with superior ones to displace it. All of these explanations are just hypotheses for the moment, but they could all be tested in the future.

We now return to our scheduled programming.

<3,
Sunshine Superboy

Reference: Tan, M., Jones, G., Zhu, G., Ye, J., Hong, T., Zhou, S., Zhang, S., & Zhang, L. (2009). Fellatio by Fruit Bats Prolongs Copulation Time PLoS ONE, 4 (10) DOI:

Looking for a working coupon code for bonobos.com?

Head over to www.bonobos.com, and at checkout use SAVEBONOBOS. This is for new email addresses only, which have not made prior purchases.

• 15 – 30% off
• Free Shipping
• Free Returns

Michael Appleton for The New York Times

Andy Dunn, a founder of Bonobos, showed off the fit of his pants at the company’s Chelsea offices. Bonobos sells only online, but has a liberal return policy and “style ninjas” to help buyers.

From the Technology: Start-Ups section of the NYT:

On a Mission to Banish the Saggy Bottom

By CLAIRE CAIN MILLER and ANDREW ADAM NEWMAN

Started in 2007 by two Stanford University housemates, the online trouser company Bonobos could have sales of $4 million this year.

WHEN women try on pants, the first thing they do is turn around and look over their shoulders into the mirror. If Andy Dunn has his way, men will soon do the same.

Mr. Dunn, the co-founder and chief executive of Bonobos, an e-commerce company that sells men’s pants, is on a mission to give American men a complex about their backsides. The pants’ distinguishing feature is that they eliminate the sagging bottom of ill-fitting trousers.

“It’s like a shame campaign,” Mr. Dunn said.

As much as he is trying to improve the way men’s clothes fit, Mr. Dunn may be having more impact on the way men buy clothes. Bonobos, which is based in New York, has no stores in which people can try on the pants, even though its pitch is superior fit. Instead, it aims to use various Web technologies to make clothes-buying less of a chore.

Bonobos would not have broken even last year on $1.6 million in revenue if it had to pay for stores and sales clerks, he said. And the men it is focusing on — those who hate to shop and have not given much thought to the way their clothes fit — prefer the ease of going online and choosing from few options.

Most men have been brought down by “the revenue-maximizing Gap or Banana Republic cut,” made to fit the widest group of people, Mr. Dunn said. The secret to the fit of Bonobos pants, which start at $88 for basic khakis and go up to $188 for silk-lined wool, is the curved waistband, said Mr. Dunn, whipping off his belt to demonstrate how a properly fitting waistband arcs in the back. The $50 Gap versions do not curve. [More]

on pants,

Most men have been brought down by “the revenue-maximizing Gap or Banana Republic cut,” made to fit the widest group of people, Mr. Dunn said.

Mr. Dunn, the co-founder and chief executive of Bonobos, an e-commerce company that sells men’s pants, is on a mission to give American men a complex about their backsides. The pants’ distinguishing feature is that they eliminate the sagging bottom of ill-fitting trousers.

alhamdulillah.

Merg vertical, fac sex fata-n fata , folosesc unelte..

Hai, spune frumos, *buna ziua*la verisori.. si fa asta fara aroganta!  :mrgreen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eubDSQrFako

I’ve said earlier how hard it is to shop for my friends and family as we pretty much just buy whatever it is we want making is increasingly difficult to surprise anyone. That said, any assistance during the holidays in pinning down the perfect gift for each individual is much appreciated. That’s why when the phone chimed today notifying me of new items in the inbox for my respective email accounts from Bonobos and Rugby, I was more than pleased. Two of my favorite companies (right now) coming through in the clutch to assist with my holiday shopping? Score. Do I know anyone that would wear goods from these outfitters? Sort of. Is it the thought that counts even when that thought comes via someone else? Sure, why not?

I know more than a few kids that would like a nice bow tie from the Polo offshoot, and who couldn’t do with a nice pair of cords, am I right? Right as rain. And even though I did just drop $600 on a new TV, I think I can find room in my heart and on my credit card to properly outfit at least a few of those close to me. Luke, in his direct sort of way, already told me exactly what he wants, and it happens to not be from either of these shops. Still, that directness really makes things a great deal easier as it’s one less thing in life to fret over. My little brother, too, already told me. Now, would Mom appreciate a University Rugby or should I stick with the subscription to 5280 and a wine & cheese of the month club I had originally intended? Decisions, decisions.

]]> http://valgregg.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/hominid-a-power-play/ Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:30:40 +0000 Valerie Gregg http://valgregg.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/hominid-a-power-play/

Theater review by Valerie Gregg

Power and sex—those eternal instigators of the human drama—intertwine at the center of a bold new theater production based on the book “Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex Among Apes,” by Dr. Frans de Waal, world renowned primatologist.

A masterful blend of science, MacBeth, and sheer theater, the play provides a humanistic context for decades of research on primate behavior, informed by de Waal’s landmark studies on empathy, conflict resolution, and hierarchical power structures. Chimps’ social behavior is largely governed by displays of dominance, aggression, and territoriality, resorting to violence occasionally to defuse conflicts. Bonobo apes, however, lean towards more peaceful ways of reconciliation like sex, empathy, and food-sharing.

The actors of Out of Hand Theater expertly used the visual body language and mannerisms of Great Apes, along with smatterings of Shakespeare, to tell the story—an epic of lust, murder, and power reminiscent of The Godfather, Hamlet, and Scarface. I imagine a young Al Pacino or Robert de Niro in a version adapted for screen. But the young actors of Theater Emory give the show its pop. Hominid is hot, relevant, and critically important. And it will sell.

Some in this techno-genomic age might find Charles Darwin and Shakespeare passe, but de Waal finds their power undeniable. “There has always been a denial of power relationships in science and academia,” he said November 15. “A taboo. That’s why Machiavelli has a bad name…. Chimpanzees are most interested in power and sex, just like humans.”

Yet the capacity for cruelty, kindness, sharing, fairness, and, most importantly, reconciliation, are crucial to the plot of “Hominid.” De Waal has never been shy about attributing “humanesque” emotions to animals. Scientists have long considered Great Apes and humans to be closely related, and DNA sequencing shows that chimpanzees and humans share 98.5 percent of the same genome.

Science has communications problems these days, and the general public urgently needs education about basic science and medicine. “There is a hostility towards science out there,” said de Waal  November 15. “Evolution is called the E-word, and climate change is a subject open for debate, even when the data support it overwhelmingly.”

Indeed. Because of a dramatic loss of habitat in Africa and decades of poaching, the primates de Waal studies are some of the most endangered species on earth.

Out of Hand Theater (a group to watch), Frans de Waal, and Emory University pulled off a cooperative coup with this little masterpiece. With courage, conviction, and funding, this kind of work promises to bring science to an apprehensive public. In a time when many Americans deny dinosaurs ever existed, work like this is a moral imperative. With bold production and larger venues, “Hominid” has major international splash potential.

[Out of Hand Theater, writer Ken Weitzman, and Theater Emory brought “Hominid” to the stage at Emory University November, 2009 to small audiences.]

DeWaal’s most recent book is titled “The Age of Empathy: Nature’s Lessons for a Kinder Society.”

Like the ones shown in this TED talk by Sue Savage-Rimbaugh:

The important thing to remember, though, is that what SSR refers to as “language” is not really a language as we understand it.  Having a language means, ideally, that you can (at least potentially) communicate everything you want to. Learning to associate individual sings with places or things is a completely different matter. It’s like memorizing the meanings of a bunch of traffic signs  as opposed to learning the language in its entirety.

Further proof that the bonobos don’t communicate with SSR in what we call “language” is that they don’t create new meanings, for instance by combining a few of the signs they already know. This is an important part of language acquisition in humans: a human child will be able not only to imitate what the adults say, but also creatively recycle the words she already knows into new sentences with new meanings. Can you seriously maintain that anybody who is unable to do that can communicate in a language?

The scenes where bonobos seem to understand directions given in human speech are rather misleading as well. All the activities in which they engage – and I don’t want to spoil anything for those who didn’t watch the video first – are not something they engage in for the first time. In fact, it is explicitly stated that the bonobos learned everything  by observing and imitating humans. This means that the experimenter doesn’t really have to say anything, because when equipped with the tools needed to imitate a certain human behaviour, a curious, not hungry bonobo will most likely do just that. Also, please notice the experimenter’s body language as she asks the bonobo to take her lighter. She might have as well said nothing at all.

But nevertheless, the video is still interesting. Also, while it is necessary to remind and be reminded from time to time that humans are not as special as they like to think, and that other apes may seem uncannily human sometimes, we should not athropomorphize them.

And, while the human ape is just an ape, it was  the human ape who noticed that the giant rock she was standing on moves, and has been for approximately the past 4.54 billion years  in a universe that is approximately 13.7 billion years old.

Looking for a coupon code for some of the best fitting pants in the world? I have that below. If you are not familiar, www.bonobos.com, makes some incredible clothes, and offers incredible service with that. In a nutshell, what I love about Bonobos:

• Awesome fitting clothes
• Very cool and eye-catching yet subtle details
• Great customer service
• Very fast  shipping
• Great return policy (useful for making sure you get the perfect size!)

Use this code for 15% off your first order and includes free shipping: savebonobos

Me suck you long time

Cientistas de Guandong, na China, descobriram uma espécie de morcego que pratica sexo oral. É a terceira espécie detectada que curte uma felação; as outras duas somos nós humanos e os bonobos.

No mundo animal, o sexo é feito com aquele quê de obrigação, um pouco como escovar os dentes. Nenhum animal realmente curte trepar e, evolutivamente pensando, é compreensível o fato de que o sexo oral não seja uma prática difundida pelas espécies. Afinal, sexo oral não faz neném.

Os morcegos chineses não fazem um boquete convencional: a morcega lambe a base do pênis do parceiro enquanto a glande já está dentro da sua vagina. Esses chineses, viu, são tão elásticos!

A lambeção toda não é feita meramente para o prazer do morcego, mas apenas para prolongar o tempo da cópula. Já no nosso caso, a prática do sexo oral é pura diversão e entretenimento, um aspecto cultural herdado dos nossos ancestrais.

Enfim, toda uma macacagem.

Dizem os biólogos que os bonobos, nossos parceiros do fellatio, são a espécie mais tarada do Planeta, enfiam o pinto em qualquer lugar que eles encontram e adoram se roçar em qualquer superfície razoavelmente lisa, que é pra não machucar.

Quando adultos, os bonobos passam o dia inteiro fazendo duas coisas: comendo e trepando. Um pouco como Marlon Brando em seus anos derradeiros, só que sem a parte da obesidade mórbida.

É.

Os bonobos é quem sabem das coisas.

Cai dentro!

I pride myself, like I’ve said time and time again, on not blindly promoting products. Sure, a few here and there sometimes make their presence known on the site, but for the most part, I have had some interaction with what goes on Momentum. For instance, my Bonobos cords. I left work an hour early to skip out on snow packed traffic to come home and stay in the warmth. And what did I throw on almost immediately? My Imperial Navys. Kept me cozy all night, or until I passed out on my couch watching the new and not-as-funny-as-I-had-hoped South Park.

While I still need to go visit my man Keith in Vegas to get my cords tailored, it is tempting to take a few of the dollars I’ve saved for the trip after getting this in my inbox this morning: We noticed that you’ve bought a pair of our amazing cords and thought you might enjoy picking up another pair as winter approaches. For a limited time only, get the Royal Defenders for just $78. Enter the code COLORFULCORDS at checkout to redeem your discount. Bonobos, you’re killing me. In the best of ways. But really, who wants to come to Vegas? I’ve never been. I’m 27 (28 in a month and a half). This is ridiculous.

- Will

As I make it my mission to bring you all some of the finest products, coolest gizmos, and lively banter from around the ‘Net, I try to do so only if I have had prior experience with said gadgets and brands. But sometimes it’s the anticipation of possibly finally maybe pulling the trigger and purchasing something new, some brand with which I don’t already own half of its collection. Enter Bonobos. A few days ago, I mentioned something about how it’s time to ditch your girlfriend’s jeans for a pair of big boy pants. While I appreciate a good deal, spending a few extra dollars on, say, a pair of their corduroys would be worth it to sport the contrast in the back pockets. That, or fronting the dough for the tiger stripe-lined wool slacks. You never know who you will meet at happy hour after work…She may appreciate a good print.

And again, I don’t blindly promote, but when I discover an item that is pretty much me in that form, it’s hard not to get giddy as a school girl on lithium and pixie stix. Anyone who knows me or has ever met me in passing, knows I have a penchant for bow ties and champagne, among a plethora of other interests. I wear it on my sleeve. So to match my sleeve, Tucker Blair thought it best via belt. Hey, it’s hard to keep your pants up when you’re getting down. And I get down. WAAAAAAAY down.

- Will

Warning: the video below may creep you out excessively. But this is something I think everyone needs to see because of its implications: the ways in which we interact with intelligent technology are evolving so quickly that, though future possibilities often excite us, the nature of these interactions seem equally likely to become bizarre and frightening. Take a look:

Many of you may be wondering what in the world I just asked you to watch. Allow me to explain. As part of his graduate thesis, German designer Stefan Ulrich worked with electroactive polymers (EPAs), a type of synthetic material—similar to everyday plastic—that changes shape in response to an electric current. Researchers have already explored the use of such polymers to make artificial muscles, even inspiring an arm wrestling match that pits an EPA robotic arm against a human. Ulrich, however, decided to take advantage of the material’s unique properties to create a shape-shifting robot of marshmallow texture and color. Ulrich claims the project, which he calls Funktionide, provides its user “with an atmosphere of presence, thus counteracting the feeling of loneliness.” Okay, acknowledging the less than satisfying translation of his native tongue—“atmosphere of presence,” anyone?—we can infer that Ulrich intends the robot as a kind of surrogate companion, one that can help offset loneliness.

Hmm. Even though this living cushion mimics the gentle rise and fall of human breathing, when I look at Funktionide slowly squirming its way towards its owner—or, perhaps, its companion—I think of nothing so much as a fly larva. But maybe that’s just me. Let’s say something like this actually would catch on with a certain subset of the population: is it really a good idea to offer up a featureless—though huggable—larval pillow as a legitimate means of combating loneliness? (This brings to mind the Japanese phenomenon of body-pillow girlfriends, or the disturbing but incredible documentary “Guys and Dolls,” which concerns men who turn to life-size dolls for sexual and emotional companionship; you can usually find it on YouTube.)

Making and maintaining interpersonal relationships with other human beings is not easy for everyone—or anyone, really. For some individuals, it’s especially difficult. There’s already a whole host of therapies for loneliness that do not depend on forming bonds with other people: herbs, dietary changes, exercise routines, anti-depressants and similar drugs, to name a few. And everyone knows cats, dogs and other pets help comfort those feeling lonely or depressed. So if some kind of artificial substitute for human companionship—even something like a squirmy body-pillow—can safely and effectively help people, why not? Well, here’s the real question: is it actually helping? Are substitutes good enough? Do they get to the root of the problem? Are they psychologically healthy solutions? Answering those questions would take a whole separate blog post—a whole book, really—but my intuition says No.

To be fair, Ulrich is not unaware of the concerns his project raises: “The work’s intention is to ask what happens if a product, which was proposed as a relief against social isolation, begins to become the solution. In this way the thesis[’s] intention is to create a picture for discussion, which enables us to question how much we want technological products to satisfy our emotional needs,” his Web site reads.

I think that’s well put. If you’ve seen popular science fiction films like A.I. Artificial Intelligence and Minority Report, then you’re already familiar with particularly vivid examples of futuristic technology designed specifically to “satisfy our emotional needs,” like android prostitutes, interactive holographic girlfriends, and the ability to live out our desires in virtual reality. The problems with such speculative technologies are clear: they effectively drive people away from one another, encouraging convenient and synthetic fulfillment of people’s basic psychological needs—encouraging illusions.

Now, we’ve all heard the pervasive arguments that in today’s world of cell phones and text messages, of e-mail, instant messaging, Facebook and Twitter, we daily deprive ourselves of genuine face-to-face interaction in favor of communication from behind computer screens, avatars and online aliases. But I don’t agree with many of those arguments. Cell phones, e-mail and online social networks have invaluably augmented our ability to communicate with one another. These are immensely helpful tools on which many of us depend—and justly so. Do you really want to go back to the era of Jane Austen, when handwritten correspondence was pretty much all you had to work with, and many a day was passed with palms pressed to the window pane, awaiting the messenger with your beloved’s letter in hand? And how could we give up the opportunity to instantly scrutinize the Facebook profile of a potential romantic interest, a perfectly accurate and impartial means of judgment? Pride and Prejudice 2.0.

What we do need to remember is that we are extremely social creatures, perhaps the most social creatures on the planet (with the possible exception of Bonobos: “Bonobos are peaceful. Aggression is diffused by sex and play”—frisky little apes!). Our social, emotional and psychological needs didn’t exactly evolve to be fulfilled by dolls, robots, computers, or pillows—regardless of how squishy, lifelike or intelligent they are. People need other people. And—at least right now—there is no technology out there that even comes close to matching the emotional intelligence of a human being. Yes, human companionship can be incredibly confusing, frustrating and difficult to understand and navigate; yes, certain individuals suffer a loneliness so great they need therapy, not just company. But there is real danger in substituting interactive technology for human relationships. We all need to learn and grow socially—by taking risks, by making mistakes, by confronting both love and rejection. Our brains expect it, demand it! When technology threatens to become a permanent substitute for the friendships and intimate relationships vital to natural human psychosocial development, that’s when we need to stop and rethink the implications of what we’re creating. Not when we spend a bit too much time choosing the perfect profile picture for Facebook, or abbreviate some words in a text message, but when we spend more time in a virtual world than outdoors (oh wait, maybe that’s already happened…)—or when we wake up with marshmallow larvae breathing silently beside us: that’s when we need to stop and rethink

 This is a good day for those of us who like to hear, and tell, stories of Human Origins: The current story in the scientific world has been told for a while now, ever since Don Johanson found Lucy, the Australopithecus afarensis, in Hadar, East Africa in 1974: We are the children of small-brained, upright-walking primates who lived some 3 million years ago—primates with insignificant canine teeth, and almost-human hands with opposable thumbs. A creature living on the savannah, enforcing the perception that it was the loss of woodlands that made our early ancestors get up on two legs and look around.

But now we have a brand new chapter in our Story of Origin. Ardi is being introduced to the world, in today’s issue of Science Magazine and all over the newsmedia: Ardipithecus ramidus, a new ancestor (perhaps), at least another traveler on the road that lead to Homo sapiens. The painstaking assembly and interpretation of Ardi’s fractured bones (skull, teeth, pelvis, hands, feet) took 17 years, but now the researchers, including Gen Suwa, Tim White, Yohannes Haile-Selassie, C. Owen Lovejoy and others,  have made their findings public. Ardi’s species predates Lucy by more than a million years, and it lived not far from that very same region. You can explore the details yourself if you are so inclined; personally, I am so excited that I can barely contain myself—this is the story I have been waiting for ever since the news of Lucy broke. What came before Lucy? Since 1974 we have known that the previous picture of early hominids as knuckle-walking, big-brained apes was wrong. We didn’t first develop the big brain, and then get up and walk. It was the other way around. But how far back in time did we diverge from the apes, and when did our hands leave the ground for good? We know that there were medium-sized monkey-type creatures dating back some 8 million years, and even dating back to the first early mammals, 60 million years ago, there were little mouse-sized mammals with some primate characteristics. But where the question gets interesting for most of us who are not paleontologists is, when did we start out on the road to becoming “Human”?

Of course this is one of the primary reasons why Darwin’s theory (The Descent of Man, 1871) met with such massive resistance which can still be felt whenever the debate swings in the direction of Creationism and Intelligent Design: Did we descend from chimpanzees? The Darwinist answer has, usually, been No, not exactly: We and the apes we know today descended from a common ape-like ancestor—we just had to look around for a “missing link” that could show us the intermediary version. Since then, the entire concept of a “missing link” has been discredited: Evolution doesn’t work that way—we don’t have links in a straight chain, but rather a multitude of branches that arise and die out, with some branches ending up being more successful than others. And besides, so few fossils are ever found that it would be astonishing to find an exact Happy-Medium form in-between two distinct species. Well, perhaps that’s what we have now. While Ardi is not a “missing link” (because we should stop using that terminology), she is so old that she represents a hominid (or hominim which is the new and more exact term) who is not even as “human” as Lucy who was truly not very human except for her manner of walking, and her hands. So is she more like an ape? And this is where the surprise comes in: Not really, even if her feet look like ape feet. If ever we humans were ape-like, it must be even further back in time, because Ardi seems to have (1) been upright, judging from the position of her head and pelvis, and (2) had smaller canine teeth than apes. Furthermore, this is the end of the fantasy that we evolved bipedalism on the savannah: Ardi lived in and among the trees, judging from other fossil finds in the area! But even so, she was already upright and bipedal at least some of the time. So was she Lucy’s ancestor? They don’t know yet for certain, but there’s a good chance that her species gave rise to Lucy’s species. And if that is the case, then she is also our ancestor. And she was not typically ape-like. Now that has got to please those who have a problem with the notion that we are “descendants of apes,” but that would be a premature celebration—it doesn’t mean we are not related to primates, it just means that some typical ape-like features were lost in the human line much earlier that we thought, and perhaps the human line never had them, such as chimp-style knuckle-walking. And the chimps and the Bonobos are still our closest living cousins on the planet. That hasn’t changed.

Now all this is factual as well as interpretative science. Why am I so excited? For one thing, I’ve always been fascinated by paleoanthropology. But more importantly for a philosopher, I have also for many years thought that our human origin is at least to some degree a determinant for our “human condition.” That’s what today is known as evolutionary psychology, but in more philosophical terms it means that our physical interface with the world (to borrow an expression from Merleau-Ponty) is an integral part of who we are, and how we interact with the world. Our Lebenswelt includes our physical being, and our physical being has an evolutionary history. If there’s anything that unites us as human beings, aside from our DNA, across the lines of politics, religion, race, gender, and so forth, it is this common history, the physical triggers that become the emotional and cognitive triggers. This is not to say that I discount the existence of “free will,” whatever that is—but our immense array of mental choices and possibilities is grounded in our physical abilities, limitations, and history.

So what can Ardi tell us, if the scientists are right? (1) We were upright, in the trees, long before we had the brains to make plans what to do with our freed-up hands, and comfortable being face-to-face with each other, close and personal, as well as probably capable of identifying each other at a distance; (2) we did not have massive canine teeth, meaning that the males probably didn’t fight over the females, meaning that we are perhaps looking at pair bonding and a semblance of gender cooperation (if not downright gender equality) dating back 4 million years—much more like the Bonobos than the Chimps, by the way. Does this mean that we were non-aggressive creatures, food for the predators rather than predators ourselves? Some of us would probably like to think so, but we can’t make that assumption. Look at Ardi’s eyes: Perfect stereoscopic vision, looking forward. Those are the eyes of a hunter, at least potentially, perhaps part-time if not full-time—opportunistic, like chimps. Besides, Ardi was omnivorous, like we are—she was not a vegetarian. The “killer ape” theory probably shouldn’t be declared totally dead yet.

In addition, National Geographic Magazine comes out with this spin: Why did we start walking upright? What can you do with free hands? Some of us would immediately say, You can hunt. But others would add, And you can gather. And bring what you have gathered to—your mate. Or the one you want to become your mate. Jamie Shreeve suggests just that scenario: We began embarking on the road to humanity by realizing that there was a sexual advantage to being able to bring food to one’s potential partner, in our freed-up grasping hands. And the upright female has another advantage: When she’s in estrus (heat) it doesn’t show. Which, according to Shreeve, would mean that she could string along the food-bringing male, even when she wasn’t ovulating, and even play around if she was so inclined. Now that opens up new vistas for the pair-bonding theory…

There is soooo much out there on the www, that it’s a given you’re going to miss something. So the Stylemeisters beat their chests when they come across such a find.

Bonobos is fashion ‘man-speak’ at its best, and if you know your world animals (and not just think you’re one in the bedroom) you’ll know that the Bonobos is one of the most amazing creatures on Earth, a peace loving, communal living, and (yes, we know!) sexually promiscuous Great Ape that possesses nearly all of modern man’s better traits. The polo & trouser Bonobos company know that these beautiful creatures are in danger so they donate money with every sale and new customer that buys their product.

Bonobos employ intelligent, empathetic people who provide exceptional customer service, free shipping, easy returns, and overall a fantastic experience. No Markups, No Sales Pitches. Why? Because they hate shopping too. They also dislike bad service, retail music that is too loud, and dressing rooms that are too small. Worst of all, the Ninjas at Bonobos hate losing time shopping when you could be doing better things like – beating your chest like a Bonobos! So now, you can experience the ease of online shopping on ‘your time buddy!’.

So who are these ninjas, the stylemeisters ask…
Bonobos was created in 2007 by Brian Spaly and Andy Dunn while they were roommates at Business School. As legend has it, Brian began altering pants for himself using a girlfriend’s sewing machine until Brian and Andy’s friends liked the pants so much that they demanded pairs of their own. They started Bonobos to solve a simple problem: men’s pants just don’t fit well. They’re either too tight to be comfortable or too baggy to look good. By innovating in a few key areas, we’ve developed a fit that looks and feels great for a wide variety of men.

We love em!

Field Ninja – Sales Professional, San Francisco, CA
Investment Banking Intern, New York, NY
Human Resources Generalist, Chicago, IL
Portfolio Strategy Associate, Boston, MA
Director of International Expansion, New York, NY

Fall is here, meaning it’s time to put away those beach shorts, put on some dress pants, and get back to work. But if achieving career success seems as challenging as finding a pair of good fitting pants, we have great news.

Don’t despair – thanks to a fantastic new partnership with Bonobos, we’re able to offer you some much-needed career wisdom from inside an innovative, successful company…and even a discount on some amazing pants!

Here at Doostang we’re big fans of exceptionally well-run businesses with quality products, outstanding service, and an entrepreneurial spark – and Bonobos embodies just that. Started as a small project by two guys with a big vision, Bonobos has grown into a global online clothing brand.

We spoke with Dave Eisenberg, Director of Growth at Bonobos, who offered some career wisdom on what makes a successful company and job candidate. So if you’re looking to start the next exceptional business, or just want to work for one, believe us, it’s in your best interest to keep reading.

Career Insights from the Pantsmakers – What Constitutes Success.

On its site, the staff at Bonobos asserts that they are trying to build “a different kind of clothing company?” Can you share a bit about how Bonobos got started and what the initial goals were?

Bonobos got started the way a lot of companies get started: with a good idea and a lot of persistence. Brian [Spaly - founder] wanted to make pants that fit better and were more flattering, made from the world’s best fabrics. Andy [Dunn - founder] wanted to get guys out of retail stores! For Andy, retail shopping is a frustration, and he knew there was a better way. We put those two ideas together: selling premium trousers with a direct-to-consumer model online with fantastic customer service. The fashion world is full of companies where it’s all about exclusivity. Bonobos is more inclusive–you don’t have to live in New York or Paris to enjoy Bonobos. You don’t have to be a rail-thin runway model or a millionaire. We have customers in every state and about four dozen countries abroad. That’s a new thing for a premium brand.

On that note, how did founders Brian Spaly and Andy Dunn go about accomplishing these goals? Which factors were most crucial to the early success of the company?

The factor that was–and continues to be–most important to our growth is word-of-mouth marketing. For the most part, guys love the pants, and they enjoy shopping with us because we keep it hassle-free. Then they tell their friends. We have a very loyal following because we’ve grown in a grassroots way. Our team actually grew in a similar fashion. Over the past 18 months we have been searching for other bright, enthusiastic people to join our team. So while we now have a company of about 25 individuals, we haven’t lost that spark of entrepreneurial energy that got us going in the beginning.

Moving forward, how has Bonobos evolved? What have you, as a company, done to build upon the early foundation from which you rose?

I think the most obvious places that we have involved are with our products and our technology. We now offer about 40 different trousers across many fabrics–cotton twill, two weights of corduroy, various wools and wool blends, seersucker. Not to mention shorts, and soon polo shirts. We’re expanding to become not just a trouser company, but a true men’s lifestyle brand. We’re a long way away, but we’re thrilled to be working toward that goal.

With technology, we still aim to be the world’s first 100% web-driven premium men’s brand. Now, though, we have a team to help make that vision a reality. We have been able to recruit four phenomenally talented developers and designers to help create the best shopping experience on the web.

From the perspective of a Doostang community member, what do you think can be learned from “the Bonobos example?” In other words, do you believe that there are any lessons or overarching themes that motivated, young professionals might draw from Bonobos’ story?

We try and hire people who can come alive in a certain role. It is our belief that businesses succeed when the people who work on them on a daily basis are fired up about their jobs! When you pour a lot of genuine passion into a project, you tend to be more successful, because you bring a real authenticity to bear around your final product. If you’re an entrepreneur, you have to be willing to take your product or service right out to people. We sold pants out of the trunks of our cars in the very beginning. Make your product or design your service, get it out in the field, make some mistakes and learn from them. Keep your customers involved in their iterative processes and never stop learning how to make your company better.

Getting more to the point, what stands out among candidates that are seeking to be hired by Bonobos? Which qualities would the ‘ideal new hire’ need to possess?

The best candidates that we see are those who have taken the time to learn about our business before they show up for an interview and who turn a thoughtful, critical, eye to everything that we have done and bring some great ideas for what we can do to become more effective. We look for enthusiasm, humility and great listening skills in all of the people who we seek to bring onto our team! Take a look at our open opportunities here and let us know if you’d like to be a part of our team!

And there you have your recipe for success. All you need is the winning combination of enthusiasm, persistence, entrepreneurial spirit, and insight. And a good pair of pants, of course…

So visit Doostang to start investing in your career. But first make sure you invest in a pair of good fitting pants. Trust us, you’ll need them for that dream job…

Wishing you a well-tailored career,

Team Doostang

This week, Doostang users can get 20% off their Bonobos purchase. Just enter coupon code “Doostang” at check out. But hurry, this special offer ends September 21st.

:: :: :: :: ::

So, why is it, even with this “educational porn” there is still an emphasis on HIS orgasm? I thought this was about the G-spot, and therefore (in my silly logic) HER orgasm?

That was more cream pie action than I needed to see tonight.

How to Find the G spot

One of the things that make the Columbus zoo my favorite is the extensive Primate exhibits and the great enclosures they have for them, they all seem happy and well taken care of. The photo opprotunities abound as there are alot of viewing areas without glass and I can get some great shots, for the shots with glass a polarizer filter helps reduce glare and reflections. So here are some of my favorite primate pics from Tuesday…Ed

A Colobus monkey and a new friend.

A female Gorilla

A young Bonobo

A female Bonobo

Mandrill or Baboon

Willie the Male Orangutan

Sarah, the hottie female Orangutan

And finally the mama Gibbon and her adorable baby..
Hope ya’ll enjoyed these pics. I have an update on my ghost post for tomorrow, my folks think they may have identified him….

Nada contra a Teoria de Darwin.

Acho que é a melhor teoria para explicar a biodiversidade, e também explica muito bem o processo de especiação pela seleção natural.

Mas daí a tentar explicar o COMPORTAMENTO HUMANO com base no comportamento dos bonobos (um tipo de chimpanzé) é no mínimo risível. Mas alguns esforçados, como Frans de Wall (que escreveu o livro “Eu, Primata”), continuam tentando.

O material nesse livro cai naquela mesma ladainha de que “o comportamento dos bonobos explica o comportamento humano”. Isso me diverte.

Justiça seja feita: nem todos os crentes nesse tipo de “similaridade comportamental entre humanos e bonobos” são neo-ateus, mas vou mostrar aqui como fazer um defensor dessa bobagem simplesmente TRAVAR em um debate no qual ele venha tentar vender a idéia. Chamarei o alegador que defende Frans de Wall de CRÉDULO, e o seu oponente de CÉTICO. Esse papel de cético foi exercido por mim em debate recente.

Vejamos:

• CRÉDULO: É importante notar que não somos assim muito diferentes dos chimpanzés ou bonobos, conforme disse Frans de Wall. Nosso comportamento pode ser explicado pela análise do comportamento dos bonobos.
• CÉTICO: Ah, que interessante. Qual parte do comportamento?
• CRÉDULO: O comportamento em geral. Basta investigarmos a complexidade das estratégias de guerra dos bonobos…
• CÉTICO: Eu gostaria de ver isso.
• CRÉDULO: Há vídeos do Discovery Channel…
• CÉTICO: É uma alegação extraordinária. Um vídeo desse deve estar no YouTube, não? Demonstre onde está o vídeo, ou então faça o upload dele, e aponte a parte exata onde a “estratégia de guerra” é vista…
• CRÉDULO: Veja bem… Eu não afirmei que tinha um vídeo com a estratégia de guerra. <- primeira travada
• CÉTICO: Ué, então você alega e não traz sequer uma prova? Assim fica difícil…
• CRÉDULO: Mas o livro de Frans de Wall fala da intrincada estrutura política dos bonobos…
• CÉTICO: Falar é fácil! Isso qualquer um faz. Eu quero VER as evidências dessa estrutura política.
• CRÉDULO: Não é assim… O fato é que isso está descrito no livro de Frans de Wall. <- segunda travada
• CÉTICO: E o problema é que você ACREDITOU no livro de Frans de Wall e não foi investigar. Problema teu.
• CRÉDULO: Mas é importante sabermos a origem de nosso comportamento…
• CÉTICO: Importante em que sentido?
• CRÉDULO: Para entender como agimos.
• CÉTICO: Eu entendo como eu ajo. Dispenso tua preocupação. A preocupação talvez seja tua e do Frans de Wall. Não fale pelos demais.
• CRÉDULO: Entendo o seu comportamento. Você deve ser um crente no criacionismo.
• CÉTICO: Já errou! Eu acredito no darwinismo, mas sei que o escopo da teoria refere-se a explicar as espécies e como elas surgiram, e não explicar o comportamento humano em comparação com outras espécies. Tente de novo.
• CRÉDULO: Mas não temos uma fonte importante de explicação do nosso comportamento.
• CÉTICO: Claro que temos. Chama-se psicologia. Você não anda muito informado, certo?
• CRÉDULO: Mas não é uma explicação com base no darwinismo.
• CÉTICO: Aha! Então você quer é uma explicação com base no darwinismo, mas eu poderia escolher uma explicação com base no Big Bang também. Besteira. O fato de não ser explicação com base no darwinismo, não implica em que não exista uma explicação.
• CRÉDULO: Mas Frans de Wall é convincente ao dizer “como agimos”…
• CÉTICO: Opa, opa… vamos parar de covardia.
• CRÉDULO: Como assim covardia?
• CÉTICO: Notou que você covardemente usa a expressão “nós somos” ou “nosso comportamento”. Isso é jogar para a galera. O fato é que você está com uma explicação constrangedora em mãos, e, para evitar maior vergonha, tenta atribuir isso a todos os humanos ao invés de você…
• CRÉDULO: Como é?
• CÉTICO: Vamos fazer um teste. Primeiro deixe a covardia de lado e substitua o “nós somos” por “eu sou”. Depois substitua o “nosso comportamento” por “meu comportamento”…
• CRÉDULO: Mas por que isso?
• CÉTICO: Ué, você não falou que a explicação de Frans de Wall era convincente? Está com medo de aceitar a explicação para falar do SEU comportamento?
• CRÉDULO: Mas espere… A idéia é falar do comportamento de todos.
• CÉTICO: Desculpe, se você não consegue explicar nem o seu comportamento, como quer explicar o do resto?
• CRÉDULO: Ok, então prossiga…
• CÉTICO: Certo. Vamos lá. Utilize o método do Frans de Wall, e faça um relacionamento dos 10 aspectos mais relevantes para o seu sustento e sua satisfação em seu dia. Depois utilize o modelo de análise desses 10 comportamentos nos bonobos, e explique o SEU comportamento utilizando basicamente a descrição do comportamento dos bonobos. Não se esqueça de mencionar a forma como você organiza suas coisas, como você trabalha e a intimidade sua com sua esposa. Que tal?
• CRÉDULO: Mas assim também não, né…
• CÉTICO: Qual o problema?
• CRÉDULO: Não, não era esse o objetivo…
• CÉTICO: Esses 10 aspectos mais relevantes são o que além de COMPORTAMENTO????
• CRÉDULO: Está certo, mas a idéia é diferente… <- a grande travada

Nesse momento, a situação do CRÉDULO é mais ou menos a abaixo:

Essa técnica que usei de questionamento é apenas o ceticismo aplicado, a la James Randi, para investigar a alegação de um neo-ateu que queria vender a idéia de que o comportamento humano poderia ser explicado pela análise dos bonobos.

O mais divertido foi notar que o maior constrangimento da parte do alegador surgiu quando lhe pedi para mostrar com exemplos no COTIDIANO DELE a similaridade com os bonobos. Aparentemente, ele estava bem confortável enquanto usava a expressão “nós somos” ou “nosso comportamento”. Quando precisou se referir ao seu dia-a-dia, a coisa complicou para o lado dele.

Importante também notar que ele se omitiu de apresentar evidências DIRETAS das alegações dele, que, em muitos casos são extraordinárias. Tá legal, os bonobos são engraçadinhos. Divertidos, até. Mas daí a falar em estratégia de guerra? Estrutura política? Que vá enrolar outro!

Essa técnica citada aqui de questionamento cético aliado à solicitação do exemplo da aplicação do modelos sugerido na vida do alegador tem funcionado em todos os debates que participei nesse assunto.

O resultado, para o alegador da similaridade com os bonobos, é geralmente a tela azul.

Remember a while ago when I went to the Bonobos swim trunk launch? So last week I recruited my friend John (who you have seen model for me here and here) to go to the Bonobos headquarters for a personal fitting. Honestly, I wish this experience existed for women. Everyone is super cool and nice. They also totally belived in the product, which they should, bc it looks great!  Click to check out John model more pants and trunks…

From left to right: Inspector Toffs, Spider Fighters, Ron Lavenders

It is all about the fit; hugs and flares in all the right places. I am a fan of Bonobos bc its really cool to see an idea, started by a couple guys, grow into something people are stoked to be a part of because they love the product. John was digging the look as well, saying “The pants are slim but still masculine, any guy could put them on and look more put together.”

From left to right: Nanners, Solid Red, Flying Daisies

Everything can be bought online at www.bonobos.com, or you can go in for a personal fitting, AND they have a “Any time, any reason” policy for returns. I officially give Bonobos the Daily Work It stamp of approval, which is as close as it gets to an Oscar in the blogging world.