Heteronormativity part 2

Post Reply New Topic

Since this thread died somehow, I want to revive it. Newer members probably haven't seen this thread. Anyway, it's related to Heteronormativity. Let's restart this conversation.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt157681.html

I think it might have something to do with the fact that we have a natural drive to reproduce. Have you ever noticed that there's a stigma on those who either never marry or never procreate? If you're an adult who is either not married, or is married but has yet to have children, you find yourself constantly having to explain yourself to people. It's a simple fact that, once you're grown, you're expected to marry and have children.

If a parent were to find out that his child is gay, he would likely assume that his bloodline has come to a screeching halt and that his gay child will never produce a grandchild.

Don't a LOT of things have some sort of relation to the "natural drive to reproduce"? I think our lives are so centered around that very thing (I'm not including every individual, this is simply a generalization) that we, in general, struggle to deviate from that. The ability to brach off from that cycle would be a blessing. Although some may argue that we have, I tend to disagree. I might become a generally cynical misanthrope.

From an evolutionary standpoint, the most important thing we can accomplish is to simply live long enough to reproduce to ensure the proliferation of our species. It's a natural instinct that is shared by every living thing on this planet, and not just by humans.

I find it strange that a race's goal is to keep their race alive despite that they'll die anyway due to some sort of extinction. Aren't we somewhat fatalistic? Why should I care if my race will survive a billion years down the road if I'm going to die way before then? That puzzles me. My body and brain/mind aren't exactly in synch.

I'm no expert on the theory of evolution, but I think the whole point is to keep the species alive to avoid extinction.

Apparently various species aren't aware that it's inevitable.

I'm sure every person on this planet is cognitively aware that we're bound to go extinct some time in the distant future. Yet most people still have the biological urge to reproduce. I'm not sure if we're really all that concerned over the inevitable. I suppose there's some kind of innate gratification in living to see our genetic offspring.

I wish we are able to deviate from this "biological path" and not be interrogated or victimized by a stigma.

I draw a distinction--I do not think that our sex drive is rooted in an intention to reproduce.

Now, of course, from an evolutionary standpoint, reproduction is a consequence of sexual activity, but the bodies natural responses to sexual stimuli are, I suggest, related to the immediate rewards of gratification.

The drive to reproduce is, I suggest, a social construct (just like heteronormativity) and therefore artificial, rather than natural.

Maybe just don't hang around so much with ignorant people who interrogate you about having children? People like that are too annoying anyway. Even if they stopped asking about reproduction, they'd find another equally annoying topic to either interrogate you about or lecture you on. My mother is like this, and I can't speak to her on any topic except the weather without getting mad within 5 minutes.

On a different note, are you aware that about 50% of all children in North America were accidental pregnancies? Birth control can and does frequently fail. So half the children on this continent were not deliberate acts of reproduction, but only a side-effect of having heterosexual sex. It's not that people are specifically driven to reproduce in order to perpetuate the species in a conscious manner -- it's merely that we're driven to have sexual intercourse, with reproduction being a side-effect of that.

@MollyTroubletail: Isn't there a biological need to reproduce? If your reasoning is correct, that would explain teenage pregnancy.

As a biologist myself, I can assure you that the only biological drive is to have sex. The desire to have children is all cultural.

Apart from human beings, no animal is aware that copulation produces offspring, so there is no way for a biological drive to "reproduce" to have evolved in the first place. What has evolved is a hormone-induced sex drive, a mating instinct. There is also a separate and unrelated instinct to take care of newborn young. But there is no instinct to reproduce in itself, nor to perpetuate a species. That just happens by itself as a by-product of the mating instinct.

Species which don't have a strong sex drive also appear from time to time, but they tend to not last long because, obviously, they have few offspring to continue them in the future. It's not that species "try to" reproduce or perpetuate themselves in any way, but just that the ones who do happen to reproduce a lot become numerous and common, so you see them everywhere and that misleads you to come to the most obvious, yet wrong, conclusion that they actually desired to become numerous and common on purpose.

By the way, did you know that many animals in nature are gay or lesbian and form same-sex mating couples? It is not a uniquely human experience at all, despite all those idiots claiming that homosexuality is "unnatural" somehow. They could not be more wrong: it is absolutely natural, by definition, since it's commonly found in nature.

I hope my explanation clears up some confusing issues for non-biologists.

I knew that certain animals did so, but I was only aware of bonobo monkeys. I am not sure what other species participate in that.

Scientific literature shows many different examples of it, which may be available in any university library.

I just read one article recently about homosexual nesting-pairs of geese, who actually raise their young together successfully. This study found that homosexual nesting pairs raised more young successfully than heterosexual pairs (two females have double the clutch size to begin with, and two males are more aggressive at protecting the small goslings from predators once they hatch).

It's interesting that the LGBT community hasn't gotten hold of and popularized these studies even though they've been available for a couple of decades. It seems to me this would be to their benefit as an aid to education that homosexuality is a normative trait throughout the animal kingdom, and not some unusual human exception to the rule of nature.

This stigma is funny in times of severe overpopulation. I even have come to like most people without kids more than most people with kids. It's more of a "thank you for being there" than "I hate people with kids". Because I can relate to people without kids.


Life is a funny thing.

I never fully understood it, but I think the tendency is that people want to keep the human race alive. Even though life has become almost unbearable these days. It's not a logical thing.


I like your point.

OK, here comes my random information reference, but 98% of sexual activity between giraffes happens between giraffes of the same sex. I laughed when I read it, but more importantly I stored this vital piece of information, so I can bring it up whenever biological determinism is mentioned.

So, yes, the drive to reproduce is a construct. I feel that you cannot explain the sex drive. Of human beings or... any living being. You can only observe and you still wonder...