From: QueeneMUSE@aol.com
Date: Mon Sep 30 1996 - 15:20:48 MDT
'gene writes
>>Much is being said, yet of little value. Sex appeared very early on the
evolutionary theatre. Even the most primitive organisms have sex.
>>
I would think the place * of value* to study is not how like animals our
sexual behaviour is, but how it departs and why.
>>I wouldn't count sex to traits that make us human, rather vice versa.
>>
If one had a belief like that, I would explore why one has these beliefs
*just* to make sure one wasn't infected with early Christian/religious memes
that hint as sex being"base" or "animal", with nonsexuality being "elevated "
or supreme".
>>
That sex seems to mean so very much for us, is an artefact of evolution.
Should replication, as it is to be expected, to become detached from coitus,
the act itself is going to become an atavism.
>>
Yes, Eugene, of course in a limited selection perspective what you are saying
is true, however, by your logic in most people's lives ( expecpt for maybe
Catholics) ...it already is....
; )
>>
A lovable atavism maybe, yet an atavism nontheless.
>>
And what makes it so lovebable...... on parallel communication and the
subject of love....sigh....
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:46 MST