- 13 Jun 2019 23:24
There are certainly some very dysfunctionalised minds about judging by the comments on sex here.
As I have iterated before on the topic, 'sex' is nature's 'trick-or-treat', it is the evolutionary development evolved as an alternative to cloning & allows perpetual change through natural selection(of partners-if you like).
By having the ability to reproduce by coitus, creatures introduce variants, giving rise to beneficial or detrimental changes which pan out over time.
Through the ability to 'treat' both the male & female in coitus through orgasmic copulation nature has performed a 'trick' of reproduction that's different than it's earlier ancestral cousin of cloning.
By so doing it ensures the survival of the species in a range of environments that cloning could not achieve, that's evolution in action.
Additionally, coitus between male & female ensures that human capital(in our case)is invested in ensuring that any offspring also succeed to live into adulthood.
There is a social bond that we know as the 'family', which is an additional benefit(or responsibility)that cloning may or may not engender at a conscious level.
Were there no 'treat' involved in coitus between male-female, we would simply not survive, by not being able to pass on our genes, because, what would be the 'point'(pun intended) of sex, if there was no 'treat', as neither sex would be interested in coitus, that is the genius of evolution, that it has introduced a reproduction mechanism for creatures equivalent to giving bees the nectar off of the plants that attract the bees in order to propagate the plants.
It stands to reason, that either the male or female within any species, evolves through various ways, to attract the attention of their opposite numbers to improve the chances of creating an opportunity to pass on their genes.
For our species, both women & men engage in that process of fermenting attention from the opposite sex to increase their chances for physical coitus.
Real males need no enhancements to female attractiveness to ferment their interest, it's probably a throwback to when such artificial means of doing so were scarce.
It does have benefits to females, as males treat more attractive females as being potentially more suitable as carriers for their genes & are more likely as not to be protected for that reason.
An attractive female simply looks more 'healthy' ,I'm not sure that women truly know or understand the in's or out' of how men view them, subjectively or objectively, yet alone emotionally.
I think that some women generalise what men's motives are,how they view them as opposed to their view of them as individuals with personality,character, intelligence, as additions to their beauty.
Last edited by Nonsense on 14 Jun 2019 14:40, edited 1 time in total.
Andre PREVIN : "Your playing all the 'wrong' notes" .
Eric MORECOMBE ; "I'm playing all the 'right' notes,but, not necessarily in the 'right' order".