quote:
holmes is painting himself as kind of practicing "pure sex"
Whoaaaa there. You have gotten everything jumbled up into some sort of strawman.
All I said is that in its purest sense, sex as far as the human experience is concerned, is just about pleasure. Even in pairbonding, we do it for the pleasure it gives us.
Evolution gave humans sex for procreation, and pleasure to ensure the act is done. Pairbonding as a survival strategy (meaning those which did this had more surviving children) may have come to use sex as part of pairbonding. But the sex came first (as well as the pleasure?), and the physical and psychological pleasure derived from sex does not always coincide with emotions of longterm bonding.
Tendency towards monogamy is somewhat inherent to humans, though usually is serial monogamy.
The only thing I ever said was culturally imposed is the idea that humans by nature are monogamous for life, and consequently that pairbonding must be an important part of sex.
Let's get this straight once and for all.
Evolutionary models of sex MAY include emotional pairbonding. But proper models are of pairbonding using sex for additional ties, not that sex became intrinsically linked to pairbonding (such that each act of sex is an act of emotional pairbonding). No one needs to "overcome" necessarily present emotions, to have sex for pleasure alone.
Bonding (of any kind) is an important part of most people's lives and this is NOT culturally imposed. Bonding tools are numerous (sex being just one).
The FACT that numerous cultures and most early cultures were NOT fully sexually monogamous tends to undercut the idea that that is the state we came from, or that PAIRbonding is necessarily the only, or best, sexual strategy.
Now please go to the thread I opened just for this whole issue and present your counterevidence.
------------------
holmes
™ Version 4.2