Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: April 2013 Discover Magazine Article on Paleo page

  1. #1
    john_e_turner_ii's Avatar
    john_e_turner_ii is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Flower Mound, Texas
    Posts
    2,089

    April 2013 Discover Magazine Article on Paleo

    Primal Fuel
    This was an interesting article that came out in Discover this month. I think it's a good discussion about Paleo/Primal eating and living. They mention Mark in there too.

    Paleomythic
    by Marlene Zuk
    A growing movement seeks to reproduce the hunter-gatherer lifestyle: running barefoot, pondering polygamy, relying on a diet of meat. But even our ancestors never lived this way. And besides, modern humans have evolved.

  2. #2
    JoanieL's Avatar
    JoanieL is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.
    Posts
    7,411
    Hey no one told me about the polygamy! Two husbands. If the plural of mouse is mice, then maybe the plural of spouse is spice.
    "Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine

    B*tch-lite

    Who says back fat is a bad thing? Maybe on a hairy guy at the beach, but not on a crab.

  3. #3
    AuroraB's Avatar
    AuroraB is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD, USA
    Posts
    670
    Quote Originally Posted by JoanieL View Post
    Hey no one told me about the polygamy! Two husbands. If the plural of mouse is mice, then maybe the plural of spouse is spice.
    Hahahaha!!! First I've heard of that too. I booted my first husband for thinking he could have more than one.

  4. #4
    Cryptocode's Avatar
    Cryptocode is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norco, California
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by JoanieL View Post
    Hey no one told me about the polygamy! Two husbands. If the plural of mouse is mice, then maybe the plural of spouse is spice.
    Nope. One woman & multiple husbands = ployandry. One man % multiple wives = polygamy.

  5. #5
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptocode View Post
    Nope. One woman & multiple husbands = polyandry. One man % multiple wives = polygamy.
    Yeah, I haven't heard speculation about polygamy. But I understand members of this forum are speculating about polyandry at this very moment.

  6. #6
    Roary's Avatar
    Roary is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    210
    I like meat, but one husband is plenty.

  7. #7
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,398
    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptocode View Post
    Nope. One woman & multiple husbands = ployandry. One man % multiple wives = polygamy.
    Nope. Polygamy is a general term. It can mean either sex (or both) keep multiple partners. Polyandry = you are correct. Polygyny = one man & multi wives specifically.

  8. #8
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,424
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Nope. Polygamy is a general term. It can mean either sex (or both) keep multiple partners. Polyandry = you are correct. Polygyny = one man & multi wives specifically.
    Polygyny is the opposite of polyandry, now that the cobwebs are out of my head.

  9. #9
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,398
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    Polygyny is the opposite of polyandry, now that the cobwebs are out of my head.
    Yes. That's what I was trying to say. I think successfully, but maybe I made an error I'm not seeing...

  10. #10
    Brown Puppy's Avatar
    Brown Puppy is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    2
    John, you liked that article in Discover? I just read it and thought it was embarrassingly bad! She seemed to get her definition of paleo from obscure comments from paleo blogs and used those to illustrate "paleofantasies." I was wondering if she was an insulted vegan or something. Her "science weighs in" arguments didn't contain any science or references, only statements like, ' so and so suggests..." I was embarrassed for Discover magazine.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •