Alex Tabarrok of Marginal Revolution, who’s perpetually amusing mainly because he imagines he’s worldly, admiringly coughs up a sterling example of men’s perception of sexual scarcity.
I had the following conversation with a friend who wishes to remain anonymous
A: Heh, how’s it going?
Anon: Oh, so, so. I had a paper rejected today.
A: Ah, sorry, I get depressed when that happens.
Anon: Well in my case it’s not all bad. My wife and I have an understanding that whenever I have a paper rejected we have sex.
A: What! That’s a terrible system for getting papers published. What kind of economist are you?! Don’t you understand incentives!
Anon: What kind of economist am I? What kind of economist are you?! You have failed to understand what I am maximizing!
I bowed down before the greater wisdom of my friend.
So much for the evolutionary-psychology notion that women aren’t interested in sex with losers!
And, seriously, is there anything more pathetic on the planet than a man who believes the only reason women have sex is to make their partners feel better?
Sweet mother of pearl! And people keep asking me to believe it’s feminists that hate men!!!
A lot of people I know have
Submitted by Holly Pervocracy (not verified) on Tue, 2010-06-01 10:54.A lot of people I know have an understanding with their wives that whenever they both feel like having sex, they have sex. I’m not exactly sure what the “incentive” is there, but it seems pretty wise to me.
[An even wiser incentive, though, would be something like “any day with a vowel in it when we both feel like it.” Not sure why Tabarrok’s friend would be bragging that he has an incentive to submit low-quality papers to journals of his peers because that’s what gets him laid. (Not quite as bad as an EMT bragging that a friend deliberately botches CPR because his wife puts out every time he loses a patient. But… y’know what I’m saying.) Thanks, Holly. —fl]
Jeez. When things go bad at
Submitted by Thaddeus Blanchette (not verified) on Tue, 2010-06-01 22:18.Jeez. When things go bad at work, I get too depressed to have sex. Tabarrok’s buddy must have tenure, aside from having a very unsexually active and somewhat gullible wife.
having sex with a looser or a
Submitted by sextoys (not verified) on Wed, 2010-06-02 00:14.having sex with a looser or a winner is just a perception…no one in this world could remain untouched, it doesnt really matters if we are a looser or a winner… everyone has their own fights they win sometime they loose sometimes..
I saw your comment at
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-06-02 05:31.I saw your comment at Marginal Revolution.
You’re a complete and thorough nut job, who has absolutely no hope whatsoever at ever becoming a real human being. Please, do us all a favor and kill yourself now.
[Hmm. Were you hoping I’d reject this comment so your partner would “give” you sex? Too bad! (Nice demonstration of the principle of perverse incentives though.) —fl]
I’m sorry, I just had to come
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-06-02 06:27.I’m sorry, I just had to come back. I can’t believe how insane you are.
Let me explain this to your wacko, socially inept brain:
1. The guy in the story probably doesn’t actually have this agreement with his wife. He was JOKING about not getting his paper published.
2. He may have actually brought something like this up with his wife when they we JOKING about him not getting papers published.
3. Even if he does have this agreement with his wife, it’s probably an inside JOKE between the two of them. Undoubtedly, they also have a normal sex life outside of the JOKE.
This is how humans work. They goof off. They play around with each other. It’s called fun. It doesn’t have to have some deep significance. It’s called humor. It’s called play. Please try it sometimes.
Now, you might not think the joke is all that funny. Wonderful. It only got a chuckle out of me. But the fact that you find it OFFENSIVE means that you are a whacked out freak.
Four words for you, you completely crazy lunatic…
LIGHTEN
THE
FUCK
UP!
[I didn’t think it was offensive, I thought it was tragically lame. And if you’d rather not consider the implied notions that heterosexuality is inevitably transactional or that women withhold sex from themselves until they can reward male achievement, for an economics professor to miss a completely golden opportunity to mention, say, moral hazard or perverse incentive in the context of contracts for sex would be even more lame! As a punchline “bow to the greater wisdom of my friend” is… a failure of utility maximization. —fl]
“[Hmm. Were you hoping I’d
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-06-02 06:45.“[Hmm. Were you hoping I’d reject this comment so your partner would “give” you sex? Too bad! (Nice demonstration of the principle of perverse incentives though.) —fl]”
Wow!
You do have a sense of humor!
[I’m afraid so. Jumping on Tabarrok for his lame punchline (see comment response, above) would have been even harsher than jumping on his lame perception of sex as an economic activity. —fl]