The wanting to do it is what gets them to do it. The liking doing it while doing, would get them to do it again.
It's true that doing it once a year could be sufficient. But one has to think of this in terms of adaptive advantage among some beings at least tens of thousands and actually maybe all the way back to the original sexually reproducing life forms. Those with the instinct are more likely to have more fertile matings. Selection occurs in times of crisis, when producing viable offspring and offspring who themselves live long enough to produce offspring is in troubled times. It is in this context that differential fertility will make a difference in selecting those with heterosexual instinct and selecting against those without. Way back then those animals wouldn't be doing any conscious planned parenthood.
^^^^
> And if they don't like it? Reproduction doesn't depend on that does
it?
i wondered about that myself. i'd say that fucking on occasion, once a year or so given gestation, is all that's required. liking it or any attitude about it whatsoever seems unnecessary to reproduction of the species.
This kind of 'planned parenthood' wouldn't work for evolution of the species although it might work for propogation of the species, two different things. It wouldn't work for evolution, because hominids, or any other earlier species, would obviously not have a sense of 'wanting' to evolve into homo sapiens (talk about teleology!). So what reason would they have then for doing something they didn't like? They certainly wouldn't have had any religious injunction to go forth and multiply at that pre-human stage. Also, at that lower stage of evolution it is highly unlikely that sex was linked cognitively to reproduction. It has even been suggested that for a large part of the era of homo sapiens that that link was not grasped.
As far as propogation of the species is concerned, like now, you could argue that the occasional fuck out of a sense of duty (or the desire to have children) would do it. Provided that you used viagra or something similar you could perform this act grudgingly I suppose. But it would make more sense to donate to a sperm bank or something in that case.
But evolution could logically not have happened without some sort of sexual drive existing. I personally don't have any investment in either calling that an instinct or not. But as I pointed out earlier, this stipulation does not require that everyone, always and everywhere, must engage in heterosexual behaviour as a preference over homosexuality, only that this should be sufficiently the case.
^^^^ CB: This is true, but I think that this has to consider differential fertility in the context of low population crisis periods. It is when a population is in a crisis of diminution that selection process goes on, and in which heterosexual drive or instinct would be selected for. Any difference in fertility comes to be a big difference in terms of which trait or characteristic ( heterosexual instinct vs no heterosexual instinct) is selected for and which against.
Just to flesh this out a bit, there is a certain amount of infant mortality in any population, i.e. deaths of offspring before those offspring can themselves reproduce and pass on genes. So, just having one heterosexual ,i.e. critically in this discussion , fertile, sexual union can be "voided" if the offspring dies as an infant or before puberty. An individual with heterosexual instinct is likely to have lots of heterosexual unions, whereas the one with out that instinct is likely to have fewer of them ( that's a tautology or follows from the definitions of "heterosexual instinct" or lack of it). So, one with heterosexual instinct is likely to be biological parent of more children than one without it. This differential fertility is significant in selection, because those without heterosexual instinct are more likely to have all of their offspring lost in infant or child mortality.
^^^^^
Tahir -------------- next part -------------- All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/public/portal_services/disclaimer.htm
This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com