3 ms·

The biological imperative is to procreate. I don't want to split hairs and separate the mechanism from the goal. It's true there is plenty of social pressure to

by qjz 16y ago

The biological imperative is to procreate. I don't want to split hairs and separate the mechanism from the goal. It's true there is plenty of social pressure to have sex or to be more sexually appealing, short of achieving the goal to have offspring. It doesn't matter. Remove the social pressure and people will continue to have children. It's not like they're going to forget how. Biology will take over. I think there's overwhelming evidence for the social pressure to NOT have children. China's one-child policy comes to mind, along with the trend for certain categories of women in developed countries who are delaying childbirth until long after they become fertile. The contraception industry alone is enough evidence, and I'd be willing to bet that most abortions are a result of social pressure than medical necessity. Both types of social pressure exist, I'm just under the impression that more people are actively discouraged from having children than otherwise. Neither trump the biological imperative we feel, consciously or unconsciously, as sexual organisms to reproduce.

telemachos 16y ago
I understand that you don't want to split hairs, and I don't want to split them merely to be difficult (or pick nits). Nevertheless, I'm not entirely convinced that we can avoid the distinction between the desires for sex and for children. I remain unconvinced that the driving desire is for children (or procreation, as you put it now). My argument, in a nutshell, is that we can see that the desire for sex is primary and paramount by observing human behavior. The desire for sex precedes, outlasts, contravenes and cuts across the desire for children. Beyond that, I don't think contraception is necessarily evidence for pressure to not have children, so much as evidence for a desire to control when and how many children to have. Certainly some people use contraception to avoid all children, but surely many more people use it in an effort not to have over large familes, no? As evidence for this (partial, because there are other factors like fear and permanence) consider that most people choose less reliable one-off contraception rather than a vasectomy or tubal ligation, even when both are readily available. China is one country, and in this regard somewhat exceptional.

by qjz 16y ago

telemachos 16y ago

I understand that you don't want to split hairs, and I don't want to split them merely to be difficult (or pick nits). Nevertheless, I'm not entirely convinced that we can avoid the distinction between the desires for sex and for children. I remain unconvinced that the driving desire is for children (or procreation, as you put it now). My argument, in a nutshell, is that we can see that the desire for sex is primary and paramount by observing human behavior. The desire for sex precedes, outlasts, contravenes and cuts across the desire for children. Beyond that, I don't think contraception is necessarily evidence for pressure to not have children, so much as evidence for a desire to control when and how many children to have. Certainly some people use contraception to avoid all children, but surely many more people use it in an effort not to have over large familes, no? As evidence for this (partial, because there are other factors like fear and permanence) consider that most people choose less reliable one-off contraception rather than a vasectomy or tubal ligation, even when both are readily available. China is one country, and in this regard somewhat exceptional.