Sex IS the instinct for reproduction. For the vast majority of the mammals (and others) on the planet, they are attracted heterosexually, and programmed by nature to be so in order to propagate the species. Just because humans can discuss and analyze the instinct doesn't remove the origins and purpose.
If sex were divorced from the drive to reproduce, homosexuality would be statistically numerous in nature, and males would breed with males just as readily as females. But they don't. Nature is more conservative with energy than that.
Hunger IS the instinct for self-preservation. We don't eat simply because we like eating. We like eating because we're hungry and need nutrients.
It's a bit wishful thinking in self-determinism to elevate human instincts beyond the influence of nature and genetics.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
What I wonder is why the age of consent is different from the age of majority. If a person can't be trusted to make mature decisions in a voting booth or whether or not to buy cigarettes or to sign any contracts (military, business, etc), then why is that person mature enough to make decisions about marriage (contract) and/or sex with adults? :confused:
I'm not sure what the age of consent/majority should be (and that would depend on a lot of social factors, btw, not just biology) but I am sure these 2 should be one and the same!
•
Pix Wrote:What I wonder is why the age of consent is different from the age of majority. If a person can't be trusted to make mature decisions in a voting booth or whether or not to buy cigarettes or to sign any contracts (military, business, etc), then why is that person mature enough to make decisions about marriage (contract) and/or sex with adults? :confused:
I'm not sure what the age of consent/majority should be (and that would depend on a lot of social factors, btw, not just biology) but I am sure these 2 should be one and the same!
Just like with drinking, cigarettes, and even driving, whatever age the government says you can start doing it, there will still be people doing it earlier than that.
•
ShiftyNJ Wrote:Just like with drinking, cigarettes, and even driving, whatever age the government says you can start doing it, there will still be people doing it earlier than that.
What's your point? :confused:
•
Posts: 2,751
Threads: 77
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
Hardheaded1 Wrote:If sex were divorced from the drive to reproduce, homosexuality would be statistically numerous in nature, and males would breed with males just as readily as females. But they don't. Nature is more conservative with energy than that.
no. this would happen if the sexual instinct was divorced from gender. there is no reproductive instinct other than the sexual instinct.
Quote:Hunger IS the instinct for self-preservation. We don't eat simply because we like eating. We like eating because we're hungry and need nutrients.
hunger is the instinct of the contraction of the GI tract (appetite is inhibited when the GI tract is distended <-- appetite actually needs to be inhibited in the human body, so our instinct to eat wouldn't get us far on its own at all), and the instinct of decreased glucose, amino acid, and fatty acid levels in the blood.
thirst is an instinct of cellular dehydration.
self-preservation goes way beyond hunger and thirst and basic bodily functions. it's a behavior that arises from complex neural processing of multiple factors including but not limited to assessment of the immediate environment, long-term predictions about the future, previous experiences, relationships with other people, status, etc.
•
Posts: 2,751
Threads: 77
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
ShiftyNJ Wrote:IDK @meridannight... you know how women talk about their "biological clock ticking"? It may be more of a female than male thing, but I do think at least some of us do have the urge to produce offspring.
i think there is a big difference between what one wants, and what one feels compelled to do.
sure, men love sex and want to have it. but we also feel compelled to fuck outside those conscious wishes.
men can want to have kids. but i have yet to see anybody walking around feeling compelled to produce a baby so much. i haven't seen a single person like that.
it's not meeting another person and feeling, 'damn, i want a baby right now. gotta have that thing'. but it is meeting another person and feeling, 'i wanna fuck right now'. that's where the difference is. sex is the instinct. reproduction is just the consequence.
•
Hardheaded1 Wrote:If sex were divorced from the drive to reproduce, homosexuality would be statistically numerous in nature, and males would breed with males just as readily as females. But they don't. Nature is more conservative with energy than that.
Hasn't there been recorded examples of homosexuality in the animal kingdom though?
•
Of course homosexuality has been observed in nature outside humans, but the statistical norm is where the main purpose of genetic drive is seen. Albinism occurs, hermaphroditism occurs, and a host of other variations that are deviations from the norm.
The biological imperative is to breed, and nature's programming to breed is to propagate the species. Intellectual analysis doesn't change that. It doesn't make humans victims to blind instinct, but it doesn't redefine the instinct either.
•
meridannight Wrote:no. this would happen if the sexual instinct was divorced from gender. there is no reproductive instinct other than the sexual instinct.
That is obviously untrue. Parenting itself is instinctive. Is it 100%? No. Nor is heterosexuality. But the existence of both instincts are obviously driven by the reproduction drive.
In nature, the sexual instinct is rarely divorced from gender, thereby accomplishing the genetic imperative.
Exceptions are just that, exceptions. A herd of horses may have a homosexual act here and there in the herd, but there aren't entire populations of male only horses, as nature programs reproduction to occur along genders for a reason, and it isn't pleasure.
•
Posts: 2,751
Threads: 77
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
03-01-2015, 11:02 AM
(Edited 03-01-2015, 11:09 AM by meridannight.)
Hardheaded1 Wrote:Exceptions are just that, exceptions. A herd of horses may have a homosexual act here and there in the herd, but there aren't entire populations of male only horses, as nature programs reproduction to occur along genders for a reason, and it isn't pleasure.
are you talking about herds in the wild or in the captivity? also different animal species exhibit different homosexual prevalence.
long time ago, i came upon a scientific article on some rams mating exclusively with other rams. they won't go near the female sheep, and attempts to get them to do it failed. rams have exhibited exclusive homosexuality (wikipedia says it's 8% of the male population that do this). i forget my original source, though i could probably backtrace it if i put some time into it. what do you think about those rams then? (ps. there are some other species that show exclusive homosexuality besides the rams).
you and i disagree on that basic premise. i see reproduction as a natural consequence of the pleasure instinct (sex) (i limit myself to humans for now, because i am aware some other species' mating behavior is a bit more complicated). and this is so obvious to me when i look at it.
you look at it differently, you seem to see reproduction as the instinct and as the driving force in its own right, and sex is the byproduct or side effect of that. is that how you see this?
Quote: But the existence of both instincts are obviously driven by the reproduction drive.
i see homosexuality and heterosexuality as two different expressions of the same underlying instinct -- the sexual instinct.
•
|
