QOTD

[autographedcat]

"Human beings took our animal need for palatable food … and turned it into chocolate souffles with salted caramel cream. We took our ability to co-operate as a social species … and turned it into craft circles and bowling leagues and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. We took our capacity to make and use tools … and turned it into the Apollo moon landing. We took our uniquely precise ability to communicate through language … and turned it into King Lear.

None of these things are necessary for survival and reproduction. That is exactly what makes them so splendid. When we take our basic evolutionary wiring and transform it into something far beyond any prosaic matters of survival and reproduction … that’s when humanity is at its best. That’s when we show ourselves to be capable of creating meaning and joy, for ourselves and for one another. That’s when we’re most uniquely human.

And the same is true for sex. Human beings have a deep, hard-wired urge to replicate our DNA, instilled in us by millions of years of evolution. And we’ve turned it into an intense and delightful form of communication, intimacy, creativity, community, personal expression, transcendence, joy, pleasure, and love. Regardless of whether any DNA gets replicated in the process.

Why should we see this as sinful? What makes this any different from chocolate souffles and King Lear?"
--Greta Christina

(via Sex Is Not The Enemy)

Comments

[batyatoon]

That's beautiful. And very well put.

But there's one thing I do have to point out here, and that's that I come from a religion that has very, very strict boundaries around what we can do with our animal need for palatable food, our ability to cooperate as a social species, our capacity to make and use tools, and our ability to communicate through language.

And, needless to say, the same is true for sex.

Which means the argument doesn't quite have the force it's meant to, as the speaker seems to assume no one could ever see anything sinful -- not sinful -- about a chocolate souffle.



[Sorry; forewarned_is is a roleplaying LJ of mine. Oops. *sheepish* Deleted the original comment.]

[museinred.livejournal.com]

Keeps me thinking. . . Happy Valentine's Day. I would have sent a card, but I didn't want to sign up for their service, but still thinking of you and hoping you and Larissa had a lovely day.

[umbran.livejournal.com]

Maybe it isn't all about survival and sex. Or maybe it is.

You ever hear of what happens to a parrot if you lock it in a cage with insufficient stimulus? It goes neurotic, then crazy, then it may well die. Stimulus isn't just pleasant, the animal is designed to live in a high-stimulus world, and without it, the animal breaks down, and doesn't survive.

So, I'm not so sure that the non-necessity for bowling leagues, sewing circles, and all, is actually as clear cut as she suggests.

And, as for sex - dude, bonding with the mate is downright needful for a critter that takes a decade and more to mature. You bet your bippy there's a selective reproductive advantage for keeping your mate around with pleasure!

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Hear hear and well put!

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Absolutely true. This is why gourmands and theater-goers are also going to hell.

[joecoustic.livejournal.com]

Lovely :).

[alymid.livejournal.com]

This is brilliant! sokay if I repost?