Quote:
Originally Posted by JLarissaDragon
Darwinian evolution has been used to explain variations in species, but when it is applied to social interactions it is mostly conjecture and not a lot of empirical evidence.
|
I agree with you but a large segment of relationship self-help books posit Darwinian theories on sexuality especially perceived or actual differences between straight men and women. If this was treated as conjecture and as possible theories it would not disturb me at all. However, these conjectures are posited as science.
Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker have posited Darwinian theories of sexuality especially in regarding to male and female differences as primarily genetic modules and treat social mechanisms which are geared to impose and encourage these "differences" as mere coincidences.
Quote:
|
Sex works for procreation, but that it not the only reason. Frankly I just enjoy it, the pleasure of being united with my husband, the pleasure, closeness and security are all part of it. I have been told by 3 different physicians that I cannot get pregnant again, but that in no way has changed my sexual desire. In fact it may be stronger than ever. I would love to still be having sex at 90
|
This is the mystery of the reproduction capability paradigm which is used to measure sex drive. How can many women who are unable to become pregnant maintain a strong sex drive if reproduction is the primary motive of sexuality in human species? How can many men who are claimed to have the ability to impregnate women every hour, can have absolutely zero interest in sex or hate casual sex and are monogamous? (Yes, I believe there are male asexuals even though I am the direct opposite)