!!> Download ➺ Sex 3.0 ✤ Author J.J. Roberts – Thomashillier.co.uk

Sex 3.0 Right Now We Are At A Tipping Point.The Sex 2.0 Lifestyle Of Modern Day Society Is Undergoing A Cascading Failure.Don T Panic, This Is A Good Thing.Sex 2.0 Needs To Die.It Has Served Its Purpose And It S Time For Humanity To Move Onto Something Better.This Book Details The Sex 1.0 Era Of Human Sexual Relationships In The Time Before Property Or Marriage Even Existed, The Evolution To Our Modern Day Sex 2.0 Lifestyle And How And Why We Created The Problems That Make Modern Day Sexual Relationships So Hard.Far Importantly, It Details A Way Forward To A Sex 3.0 World A World Of Mutual Understanding Between Men And Women And A Return To Nature.

10 thoughts on “Sex 3.0

  1. says:

    It s been months I ve had this book on my currently reading list, even though I technically finished the free sample Sex 1.0 months ago, after which I had no intention of buying reading the remainder of this book It s taken me months to decide to even review this, because I m honestly terrified that the author will personally attack me for my opinions on his work, as he has done to 99% of the reviewers below Suffice it to say, I have decided to review it anyways, in spite of that risk, because I think it s important to stand up for ethics in the world of nonmonogamy It takes humility and emotional maturity to do nonmonogamy in an ethical way, and it s my opinion the author has shown neither of these qualities, both in the tone of this book and in his responses to his reader s reviews of it.First let me say I ve read and loved More Than Two A Practical Guide to Ethical Polyamory Opening Up A Guide to Creating and Sustaining Open Relationships , though I haven t written thorough reviews on either yet If you re new to nonmonogamy and don t yet know the differences between the various styles of it polyamory, swinging, solo poly, partnered non monogamy, etc , I recommend you read Opening Up A Guide to Creating and Sustaining Open Relationships, which is a well organized, thoughtful, inclusive work If you re interested in the ethics of nonmonogamy specifically, the ethics of polyamory , I recommend you read More Than Two A Practical Guide to Ethical Polyamory I agree with other reviewers that this book Sex 3.0 is not inclusive but is rather one man s opinion, an opinion generated not from sociological and scientific research interviewing hundreds of nonmonogamous people, as other authors of the books I recommended did but from his own personal experience, which limits this work s potential and makes it read, as other reviewers have said, like an extended blog post rather than a work written by an expert in the field of ethical nonmonogamy There were many times during my reading I felt a woman s perspective would ve changed some of his generalizations, and, as another reviewer said, many minorities perspectives like non binary genders were left out completely Other sexualities, including chosen monogamy, were either left out or openly vilified as unnatural and a sexual perversion when, in actuality, just as there are people like me who prefer nonmonogamy, there are people who prefer monogamy, and that is OK The author cannot blame this lack of inclusion on not identifying as a woman or a non binary gender or a certain sexuality in his personal life, as all it would ve taken for those perspectives to be included would ve been for the author to open up to those kinds of people s perspectives in his research, as the authors I recommended did in their own research.Truly, what made me despise this book though was not its author s limited research or lack of inclusion of viewpoints outside of his own what made me despise this work was the author s tone throughout, which I briefly mentioned in the last paragraph but will expand on now I read the prior reviews, some of which call this work s tone misogynist and egotistical I wanted to give this book a shot anyways, as tone can often be misinterpreted, and some readers are sensitive than me when it comes to that stuff At the end of my reading though, I d have to say I wholeheartedly agree this book s tone was a huge turn off for me A large part of this book s tone was dedicated to ensuring the readers knew how unenlightened they were I began highlighting in my Kindle every time he said something along the lines of, This book will change your life or The ideas in this book are so revolutionary and simple I m serious when I say I lost count of the amount of times I highlighted this kind of egotistical, self serving, useless language throughout and remember, I only read Sex 1.0 so basically, he spent the first third of this book talking about what a great book he was writing When he wasn t saying that, he was summarizing the science, anthropology, and biology that s created a largely monogamous culture with, as other reviewers have said, zero scientific sources or credentials to back those opinions upopinions which, because of his tone, he was treating as fact When he wasn t giving opinions about scientific topics, he was saying things like, In your personal experience, would you agree that the need to work on your relationship is good advice as relationships are often a struggle If you do then your map sucks , implying that if you ever struggle in a relationship, you re again unenlightened As simple as he said relationships should be, I question that assumption coming from a person who thinks it is emotionally mature to attack reviewers on Goodreads If that is acceptable behavior in his mind, then sure, relationships are probably superbly easy to him because he does not consider how his emotions, actions, and language may impact those around him I much prefer the opinion in More Than Two A Practical Guide to Ethical Polyamory, which is that it s not so easy to treat others ethically when hurt feelings are involved, and that is why we must be conscious of our behavior in every relationship we have A big part of me not reviewing this book for so long was out of respect for the author s feelings, which are clearly damaged easily by reviews left on his work, but I made the choice to review his work anyways, because it s important to add my voice to the community of nonmonogamous people who are trying to do nonmonogamy in an ethical, conscious way.As far as misogyny goes, I can only say I was offended at various points in my reading, and I am a difficult person to offend I will include one of the quotes that I found misogynistic and let you decide for yourself, then, I will end the review, as I think I ve made my point, which is that TL DR There are much better books on nonmonogamy out there Please read them instead Beta males are, by their very nature, pussies

  2. says:

    Reading about sex isn t my favourite way to experience it, so no matter how pleasurable it may be, I don t often do it But I do often read about psychology, patriarchal structures and behavioural economics So when one book captures all of them, it intrigues and challenges.Welcome to Sex 3.0 by JJ Roberts.If there s anybody who would support the plain talking about what men and women want without society s patriarchal bullshit, it would be me And as it turns out, also this author Sex 3.0 is a book which explains how socio economic forces drove and continue to drive the evolution of human sexuality From tribal togetherness, through the coming of property, possession and necessity of women to sell their sexuality in exchange for security marriage For anyone who hasn t started to question the tenets that hold our modern day society together and yet which at the same time breed guilt, shame and unhappiness, this book holds some illuminating truths For anyone who has, it s great to see them validated and clarified in JJ Robert s easy to read style But the success of the book and adoption of its theories is unlikely in its current state Why Readers will necessarily fall into two camps 1 Those who haven t yet questioned how society operates 2 Those who already have Readers in group 1 will acknowledge the author s analysis of how sexuality evolved in tribal times sex 1.0 After all it s a nice hypothesis if lacking in the scientific analysis and documented displayed research demonstrated in Chris Ryan s Sex At Dawn and doesn t threaten the status quo They may even find themselves nodding along to how property forced men and women into playing games which prioritized concerns around paternity and made virginity a prized possession, but how even this didn t stop our roving eye paradigm sex 2.0 or fenced relationships And readers in group 2 will also nod in acknowledgement of the truths set out by JJ Roberts But the leap to unfenced relationships in sex 3.0 is a tough one And that s where for both sets of readers this book lets itself down.Like most people in open relationships, who have had to challenge society norms, I belong to group 2 And group 2 is made up of individuals who don t accept given truths even if they are published in the gospel on the internet There are several given truths in Sex 3.0 which are open to debate and which when unravelled, risk undermining the readers acceptance of the whole.Why jealousy is not natural and not needed as posited in Sex 3.0Argument 1 Jealousy is exclusively concerned with feelings of insecurity about something you had presumed was your property in this case sexual property Argument 2 The notion of sexual property is unnecessary because we have technology in modern society that can determine paternity Since the concept of sexual property is the source of jealousy, jealousy is not needed.Argument 3 Children today, even though we have had the concept of property for many thousands of years, are not born with any concept of property They are born with no innate or natural concept of ownership.The True Nature of JealousyJealousy is one of the biggest hurdles for anyone who opens their relationship, and eradicating it necessitates an indepth study of its foundations Jealousy is certainly the flip side of insecurity, but insecurity manifests itself not only around sexual property but also and predominantly about fear of abandonment In fact, I would hypothesize that what JJ Roberts proposes as the definition of jealousy being insecurity about sexual property, is not jealousy It is simply posessiveness and or entitlement an emotion often felt at the same time.So what is jealousy Jealousy is a feeling generated by the mind to support the survival theory.I am incomplete and require this particular person to complete me incomplete people do not survive therefore I must have this particular person to survive.For many of that, that incompleteness has manifested itself simply by birth, i.e by the separation of us as individuals from our mothers and later perhaps reinforced by lack of childhood love from primary caregivers It is a necessity of the human condition that in some measure, great an unacknowledged and unhealed wound from preverbal experience or small through the general course of life and easily overcome by persistent rational thought we will experience this type of insecurity which in turn drives a need and desire for love Without close scrutiny, we continue to think as adults that this need can be satisfied externally it cannot Only of course self love can make you secure.Thus it is only when you love and trust in yourself enough, that you can deal better with possessiveness and entitlement or the sexual property aspect which contributes to the monogamous paradigm of Sex 2.0 although nevermind that many women from a biological aspect don t particularly care who the father of their children is after the fact and have on the whole far less concept of sexual property than men.What is natural and does unnatural equate to unnecessary What JJ Roberts defines as natural is something innate that with which you were born versus normal that which you were taught I don t dispute the definition The question concerns whether normal can or should be unlearned And if so, at what point it should be unlearned.Because it is inconceivable and impossible that children can be raised only to act in line with their nature and survive to adulthood It is one of man s greatest accomplishments to put in place survival mechanisms which help us cope with living on this earth To that end of course when we are adults, jealousy no longer serves its purpose and I agree that it is freeing to discard it But as children, the need and desire for external love which can obtained where lacking by using the mechanism of jealousy is necessary for their survival This is embedded in the deepest subconscious of the reptilian mind and is part of what we call instinct And as we are all the sum total of our experiences as they intersect with our genes so without adequate nurture of our nature, we would die.Whilst group 2 readers may question the definitions, arguments and tenets set out, what about group 1 Well they have an even bigger hurdle They will need to be convinced not only it is unnatural and unnecessary which I believe is an premise containing holes as outlined above , but also that it is unlearnable That s a hard sell in one chapter.What I want for this book is to be a missive a beacon of enlightenment for group 1 readers But Sex 3.0 doesn t adequately give substance to the unfenced relationship map and so fails in convincing readers of its plausibility as a whole.The goal of the book as outlined by the author at the beginning is to provide a new map for relationships But no book can persuade readers through only emotionless hard analysis, psychological half truths and noticeably masculine oriented sweeping assumptions about women and their motivations no matter how groundbreaking his analysis is.Review republished from author s own Book Reviews at Louisa Leontiades

  3. says:

    In short, I agree with nearly all of Roberts sentiments, but a few citations would have been nice This reads like an extended blog post than a true scientific endeavor.

  4. says:

    When I heard J.J Roberts on a podcast talking about his view, as he does in this book, on relationships, I had to purchase this book Listening to him was refreshing because I ve been pretty much been saying the same stuff to close friends and colleagues I don t think the old adage ways of going about or thinking of relationships is helpful to anyone Look at all the pain, hurt, failures of such a motto It s not because people haven t found the right one or any crap like that, it s because we are going against our very nature, like we do with so many other things in our current ways of first world living Reading this book slammed the ball out of the park and helped solidify my feelings in regards to old societal put you in a box make you usually miserable in the long run relationships They stink and they need to die and damn it, that s a good thing Here s to being truly human

  5. says:

    I liked his terminology and the care he takes with his language I especially liked his four pillars model Communication, Honesty, Trust, Respect I believe he s about 90% right in his main argument less so in some of his side arguments and reasoning But I just don t see this book winning over any minds If I were still fenced , I m not sure this would be the book to unfence me.The basic premise is something you probably already know what we think of as normal relationships dating, marriage, monogamy are an unhealthy and unnatural side effect of our neolithic switch to agricultural society Hence Sex 1.0 prehistoric , 2.0 historic, broken and 3.0 The Glorious Future Although Roberts doesn t quite preach he claims to describe, not prescribe, and I think he succeeds at that his tone is sometimes a bit too smug for my taste And some of his science is, IMO, questionable I happen to be a big fan of Sarah Blaffer Hrdy s work, and found myself thinking that Roberts could learn a bit from her.Ev Psych aside, the rest of the book is surprisingly good ethical, responsible, readable I m just not quite sure who his target audience is I d love to hear opinions from any fenced readers.

  6. says:

    Interesting research on human relations Authors casual approach to the reader is almost like hanging out and having a chat during a BBQ Author exposes truths to relations between man and woman and most common reasons why they fail In theory the Author chooses to portray freedom of sexual judgement in order to solve the timeless problems men and women face interacting with each other I will say the tittle mislead me to believe it was a sex manual like Kama Sutra Although exposed to the possibility that a open and honest approach to sex would be good and ideal I can see that putting it in practice might be harder as people s general nature is not easy to change Good food for thought Would recommend this book to anyone having a relationship problem.

  7. says:

    In this book, J.J Roberts talks about how some of today s customs regarding sexual relationships were established In doing this, he helps you to understand how these customs are obsolete, and how you can choose to have an alternative, Sex 3.0 lifestyle.I feel that most people have a degree of unnecessary suffering that stems from trying to engage in traditional behavior that is unnatural to humans, and the thing I like about this book is that it helps you to see possibilities that you may not have been aware of before.Once you realize that you don t have to do things the way you re supposed to , and that you can back up your decision to live alternatively with solid reasoning, you have a freedom that can t be taken away.

  8. says:

    I find many of the points interesting and agreeable But I think there are a few things worth mentioning when you re talking about sex Children and STDs.I think that right now, people who are married have many benefits in some countries that are missing from people who are single This things are important for a Sex 3.0 world to succeed.Of course you could say that the law is always behind social change, but when you consider that people in unfenced relationships will be at a disadvantage when having children, we must not leave this topic aside.The other thing is the responsibility about STDs in unfenced relationships It is not mentioned anywhere on the book and I think it is worth giving it a few paragraphs at least Still, a very interesting read.

  9. says:

    The author makes a very good intellectual case for an improved worldview of relationshipsone where unfenced relations are predominant Being unfenced according to him means dropping societal conventions, jealousy, drama, and relationship distress Every person gets to choose exactly the type and kind of relationship that they want to pursue and is free to stay or leave according to their own feelings.I agree with the author s worldview I really don t see how most people could logically dispute its merits But social conformity seems to trump all in this world, so I really don t see the trend being adopted on a grand scale anytime soon.

  10. says:

    So, um, apparently this dude read a bunch of Wikipedia pages on evolutionary psychology and then distilled them into a rambling sexist, cissexist, heterosexist blog post about polyamory which he then tried to pass off as a book I got this for free and I think I still overpaid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *