It’s About Making Babies!

LisaQ asks at 20-Forty.com, “Should You Call Or Text?”

Think about this a moment. Think in terms of communication “bandwidth”.

With texting you have a single strand - the keys, the screen. With a pattern, a word choice you can *intuit* emotions, background - whether this is a group effort on the other end and everything is being recorded for “OverheardInNewYork.com”.

With a call, you get a bit of background noise - clicks from the Cubans or FBI turning their recorders on, people eavesdropping or giving advice. You get tone of voice, the pattern of pauses - a sense of where the caller’s interest lies, a sense of whether this is a slick booty call or an honest communication of the heart.

With face to face time, you have the display of a commitment in effort and time - they found where you were, and took the time and effort to come to the time and place. You get their clothing selection, their body language, even an exchange of the hormones on your breaths, the eye contact - to help you be assured of the truthfulness and respect and trust and fears behind their words.

With texting you might as well be falling-down drunk, for all the information that you *don’t* have available.

Then there is the electronic side. Texting is similar to video games - busy fingers, imposing your will on the machine - and complete disregard for whatever the recipient is up to.

Plus, a text is a “small” investment in time or effort. “Just a minute” exchanges that distract from whatever you should have been doing. In a movie? So what if your cell phone acts like a flashlight, imposing light pollution on those setting near you for several rows and seats. Because it is often a conversation, your texting-partner often gets annoyed or offended at a late reply. All in all, texting *encourages* being rude to your texting partner, interrupting and continuing a conversation that should have happened at another time. Texting *encourages* being rude to people you should be communicating with, distracts you from meetings and conversations and events you are either responsible for participating in, have paid to attend, or from communicating with friends and family face-to-face.

When rural phones were first installed, back when phones were on party lines, you rang one time for one neighbor, and three times for another. To get to another line you called the operator to connect you to their line. And old-time horse-and-buggy social rules applied - no visiting or calling during supper. People would refuse to answer the phone from 5PM to 7 pm or so - that was family time. Today I see hurried families dart into Taco Bell for a “family night out”, and Mom is on her cell phone and Junior and Missy are texting. And Dad just feels lonely. Or some other combination. The point is - you *lose* time with those around you when you “withdraw” for a portable communication device. And texting is more distracting than cell phones - at least with a cell phone you are more likely to watch what is around you. You may not be driving a freight train in California - but how much “lost” friends and family time can you afford?

Sex?!?

I, for one, do it because it is a helluva lot of fun

Kira writes “Why have sex?” on 20-Forty.com. As she states above, mostly for self-enjoyment. Recreation.

Basics

Me, the model I use is the prehistoric hunter-gatherer village. What got humankind from then to now?

Babies. Babies, and families to raise them, and communities for mutual defense and to share risks and shortages. Nations organized communities for defense, to join together for bigger projects - roads, and anti-bandit patrols, and bridges, and water projects. Armies, to defend and to whack away at enemies and bandits.

And to have more fun in life.

Patriarchal religion vs. pagan reverence for life

So is sex recreation for the individual, or is it an expression of magic and mystical powers that drove the Christian church to develop binding rites to seal that power away from the woman’s use, to be available for the patriarchal church’s use (marriage, chastity, and monogamy)?

Social rules vs. natural inclination

Our bodies from ancient days have been drawn to copulate (have sex, Kira). Because babies often resulted, that was an important survival trait. We are still powerfully drawn to engage in sexual congress. The sexual stimulation is an avalanche of hormonal reactions, and we are driven to repeat the experience time and again. As Kira mentions, “a helluva lot of fun”.

In today’s culture we compromise many of our natural inclinations, urges and needs and desires our bodies express. We teach our young to use the bathroom, out of sight of others. We teach our young to play nicely, when it seems hunting-type “bash and whack” skills are more normal. We teach our kids to obey authority, and define discipline in their lives. Most Judeo-Christian faiths hold sex to be a sacred act, between couples that have performed a sanctified marriage rite. Many other religions hold sex to be a sacred act, capable of enabling creative energies and power and majyk. For many, sex is natural, as companionable as a smile, as fraught with meaning as a handshake.

Stir the gene pool

In some cultures, men encouraged their women folk to sleep with travelers. For remote communities, this was an act of hospitality, and a way to enrich a dangerously confined gene pool, resulting in genetic variety and healthier babies. And, likely, encouraging the traveler to return with outside news and goods.

Rebelling against authority

Today in America, there is a very real rationale driving folk to have sex - to rebel against authority. This has been going on on the national stage since the 1960’s. Another prime driver is to sell beer and cars. Commercials that use sex and innuendo to sell products perpetuate a myth that the products - and responsible people - are intended to create sexual opportunities.

Build the next generation army

If you read the ancient philosophy of Socrates through the dialogues of Plato, in “the Symposium” - a drinking/debating forum), Socrates lauds the bliss and heartbreak of love (between a man and a boy), and mentions the law of the land that required every man to take a wife (obviously not his first love, since she isn’t a boy) and produce sons for the army. They were always going to war, so like the Old Testament of the Bible, the government and Church were really strict to produce as many sons for the army as possible. Recall at the time that one of the tactics of a conquering army was to kill the men of the conquered nation, and rape the women. This destroyed the new land’s ability to raise an army and rebel, “soiled” the women so no one else would take their part, and mixed bloodlines for the next generation so the new land would quickly assimilate into the conquering nation. Yes, an act of birth was an act of war, in one way or another.

And it still is. I question someone that stands and shouts, “I support our troops” or ” I am a patriot” - that isn’t raising sons and daughters for the next generation’s army. Look around - other nations are building their armies, big time.

Why have sex?

I think the reason to have sex is primarily to bind a family together. That might be a couple, they might or might not be of child-bearing age or inclination. A home and family is a social construct of love and support. Because we use sex organs for sexual intercourse, I keep coming back to the reason our bodies are capable of sex and drawn to it, is about procreation. Making babies. Advertisers preach that sex is about selling products, about exerting power over others. But the enduring message is about relationships, families, communities, nations - worlds.

And building families and communities and nations is a very good reason to have sex. Did you choose your partner to achieve that goal?