Topics Sex

Question What have philosophers said about the idea that sex results in babies so therefor we should look at the meaning of any sexual act in terms of sexual reproduction? It does seem as if we didn't evolve to have sex without reproduction and therefor sex without reproduction is a modern phenomena not attached to our evolutionary nature. So maybe our emotional responses to sex and the feelings of shame that correspond with sex might be because of this evolutionary nature?

Accepted:
July 25, 2013

Comments

Something seems to have gone a bit wrong here. There can be no doubt that human evolution has effects on our sexualities, but I see no reason at all to agree with the reduction of all sexuality to reproduction. Sexuality can manifest itself in sociality and other very important aspects of human life--aspects required for fitness in the environments we inhabit. The very fact that human females are only fertile for a fraction of each menstrual cycle--but can be sexually active throughout that cycle--seems to me to show clearly that there is more to sexuality than reproduction. So I'm afraid I'm inclined simply to reject the assumption behind this question.