A personal situation for an acquaintance has led to reflections on human sexual nature. The woman in question has lived with the same man for about 14 years while not getting married. They have two children together, but she also goes ‘partying’ along with a female friend. This is of course a euphemism for more casual sexual encounters. She is now stressed with the conflict between raising her children, whom she loves greatly, and pursuing an ongoing extra-relational sexual life. There are two conflicting pieces of human biology in this story.
Humans have no estrus cycle; that is, we do not go into ‘heat’. Human females are at least physiologically receptive to intercourse at any time, and human males are attracted to females at any time. There is no specially designated hormonally based time for intercourse in humans. Analogies with blue jays, penguins and other ‘mate for life’ animals are specious and not biologically sound, any more than comparing us with fish makes it natural for us to breathe under water. There are precious few mammals without estrus; the dolphin is one, and coitus is a major form of play and entertainment for dolphins. In contrast, other great apes do have estrus cycles, and in that sense we differ from our closest mammalian relatives, just as dogs differ from foxes and wolves in certain critical ways.
Second, the human fetus is both the largest in relation to maternal body weight and yet the most immature at birth. A fetus barely fits through the maternal pelvis, with a clearance measured in millimeters, and labor problems a not trivial source of death in pre-cesarean times. While being physically large, the human newborn is quite remarkably immature compared with most mammals. The human newborn cannot walk to accompany the mother, and does not acquire this ability for about one year, or about 2% of an in-the-wild lifespan of 50 years. In contrast, a kitten, born blind and unable to walk, is walking by 4 weeks, or about 0.8% of a 10 year lifespan. Human breastfeeding, unencumbered by social expectations, goes on for 1-2 years, and the infant is dependent on the mother for food for a far longer period of time, especially as compared with other primates and mammals.
This net result of human pregnancy and the long period of baby immaturity is a protected environment is needed for the mother and child for a 5-8 year period, certainly a 3-4 year period, even accepting child agrarian work. Without a protected environment, pregnant and nursing women would be at great risk of predatory animal death and also starvation. The eventual expression of such a protected environment in modern society is marriage, especially the archetype in which women are at home with children and men earn an income (the financial equivalent of farming or hunting).
Thus we have an irreducible conflict. On the one hand, people are not biologically sexually dedicated to one mate, nor are we restricted in the times at which intercourse may occur. At the same time, the abandonment of a newly delivered or breastfeeding woman is contradictory to survival and thriving of humans as a group or even species.
Like so many other factual, biological realities in life, there is no sense in complaining about this one. The limiting facts simply exist. It is we who must come to terms in our social morals and personal behavioral choices with the realities with which we live.
Once again, I snub up hard against a remarkable reality. Biblical advice is repeatedly to find and honor a capable wife, to avoid ‘loose women’, to condemn fornicators and adulterers. There are certainly notable exceptions, such as David, but these are individual stories. The basic advice is clearly to keep yourself under control.
It is quite tempting to me to be a libertine. I am not a naturally restrained man with respect to fleshly indulgence of any kind. I want big bites and not simply to be sated, but to be swinishly indulged. But I know what overindulgence in food produces. You get fat. You feel sick, you get major illnesses. I know what overindulgence in drink produces. Drunkenness, obesity, liver damage, bad behavior, poor choices. Cigarettes and drugs speak for themselves.
But it is easy to think sex is different. After all, a libido is normal. There can be no harm in indulgence, can there? But yes, there can, and especially when children are involved.
No matter how tempting the ‘60s paradigm of free love is, it in practice does not work emotionally or practically. We must all make choices about how we live. Do we want to be single, and mate as we wish, or do we want to have children, with the attendant restrictions on personal behavior. Here I am not a moralist, and I am actually a little uncomfortable arguing in favor of ‘conventional’ morality, but it is correct. Once you are a parent, you can no longer be a free agent sexually.
My acquaintance has snubbed up against this problem. She will be anxious and unhappy until she finds a way to control herself, and her desires.
Peace and satisfaction are not found in intercourse, food, liquor and indulgence. It is found in productive work to serve people, family of course included, and philosophical contemplation of God. Ecclesiastes was right all along. Even though it doesn’t sound like ‘fun’, it is in fact a more satisfying path, because the alternative is so damaging and lonely.
Ted
Humans have no estrus cycle; that is, we do not go into ‘heat’. Human females are at least physiologically receptive to intercourse at any time, and human males are attracted to females at any time. There is no specially designated hormonally based time for intercourse in humans. Analogies with blue jays, penguins and other ‘mate for life’ animals are specious and not biologically sound, any more than comparing us with fish makes it natural for us to breathe under water. There are precious few mammals without estrus; the dolphin is one, and coitus is a major form of play and entertainment for dolphins. In contrast, other great apes do have estrus cycles, and in that sense we differ from our closest mammalian relatives, just as dogs differ from foxes and wolves in certain critical ways.
Second, the human fetus is both the largest in relation to maternal body weight and yet the most immature at birth. A fetus barely fits through the maternal pelvis, with a clearance measured in millimeters, and labor problems a not trivial source of death in pre-cesarean times. While being physically large, the human newborn is quite remarkably immature compared with most mammals. The human newborn cannot walk to accompany the mother, and does not acquire this ability for about one year, or about 2% of an in-the-wild lifespan of 50 years. In contrast, a kitten, born blind and unable to walk, is walking by 4 weeks, or about 0.8% of a 10 year lifespan. Human breastfeeding, unencumbered by social expectations, goes on for 1-2 years, and the infant is dependent on the mother for food for a far longer period of time, especially as compared with other primates and mammals.
This net result of human pregnancy and the long period of baby immaturity is a protected environment is needed for the mother and child for a 5-8 year period, certainly a 3-4 year period, even accepting child agrarian work. Without a protected environment, pregnant and nursing women would be at great risk of predatory animal death and also starvation. The eventual expression of such a protected environment in modern society is marriage, especially the archetype in which women are at home with children and men earn an income (the financial equivalent of farming or hunting).
Thus we have an irreducible conflict. On the one hand, people are not biologically sexually dedicated to one mate, nor are we restricted in the times at which intercourse may occur. At the same time, the abandonment of a newly delivered or breastfeeding woman is contradictory to survival and thriving of humans as a group or even species.
Like so many other factual, biological realities in life, there is no sense in complaining about this one. The limiting facts simply exist. It is we who must come to terms in our social morals and personal behavioral choices with the realities with which we live.
Once again, I snub up hard against a remarkable reality. Biblical advice is repeatedly to find and honor a capable wife, to avoid ‘loose women’, to condemn fornicators and adulterers. There are certainly notable exceptions, such as David, but these are individual stories. The basic advice is clearly to keep yourself under control.
It is quite tempting to me to be a libertine. I am not a naturally restrained man with respect to fleshly indulgence of any kind. I want big bites and not simply to be sated, but to be swinishly indulged. But I know what overindulgence in food produces. You get fat. You feel sick, you get major illnesses. I know what overindulgence in drink produces. Drunkenness, obesity, liver damage, bad behavior, poor choices. Cigarettes and drugs speak for themselves.
But it is easy to think sex is different. After all, a libido is normal. There can be no harm in indulgence, can there? But yes, there can, and especially when children are involved.
No matter how tempting the ‘60s paradigm of free love is, it in practice does not work emotionally or practically. We must all make choices about how we live. Do we want to be single, and mate as we wish, or do we want to have children, with the attendant restrictions on personal behavior. Here I am not a moralist, and I am actually a little uncomfortable arguing in favor of ‘conventional’ morality, but it is correct. Once you are a parent, you can no longer be a free agent sexually.
My acquaintance has snubbed up against this problem. She will be anxious and unhappy until she finds a way to control herself, and her desires.
Peace and satisfaction are not found in intercourse, food, liquor and indulgence. It is found in productive work to serve people, family of course included, and philosophical contemplation of God. Ecclesiastes was right all along. Even though it doesn’t sound like ‘fun’, it is in fact a more satisfying path, because the alternative is so damaging and lonely.
Ted
Excellent post. This really tells it like it is.
ReplyDeleteDavid
That it does, and well. It's tough when teens and young adults have trouble controlling themselves, but when we as adults do we set a terrible example. We've hardly set this generation up for success! Our real source of satisfaction, peace, and even joy come from looking back on years of hard work, the hard work of self-discipline, sound choices, and making amends for bad ones. It's a long process, filled of successes and failures. In this climate of quick fixes and instant gratification, it's a hard sell. I hope we can help turn the tide.
ReplyDelete