this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
317 points (100.0% liked)

196

16501 readers
22 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
317
Sex (Rule)s (lemmy.world)
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by GrymEdm@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] chetradley@lemmy.world 74 points 8 months ago (4 children)

An evolutionary biologist might argue that all of these are done in the service of being able to have sex:

  • Gotta make money so I can live comfortably and keep having sex.
  • Gotta defend my country because all of the women who want to have sex with me live there.
  • Man, chicks dig firefighters. I'm gonna have so much sex.
[–] TxzK@lemmy.zip 44 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

If you're talking evolution, that argument also applies to women as well. We, as a species, are still alive only because our instinct to pass down our genes. Same with every other form of life.

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 20 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Man, the people who invented contraception must have been such a fuckup from evolution's point of view. Evolution must be tearing its hear out rn

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 32 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

There's a lot of evolutionary processes that don't have to do with having more offspring, but increasing the viability of less offspring. Having kids, no matter the species, is a very costly affair. You could argue that mate selection generally reduces the number of offspring, but increases the viability.

I've read a hypothesis (very much unproven) that having some gay members of a species increases the viability by having more people to care for the offspring without being in mate competition. It's called the gay uncle hypothesis

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 8 months ago

The grandma effect of manopause still applies whether or not we evolved with reproductive thresholds in order to secure that advantage.

So whether or not the gay demographic originally served the population by providing more adults to kids, it certainly does now.

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 months ago

I like this

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

People who can have sex but choose when to reproduce experience more satisfaction and control over their lives, which leads to better outcomes for the children they interact with, who will most typically share a large number of genes, since the children we tend to interact with most are family. Children who experience better outcomes are more likely to themselves raise more children.

All good things for your common man are evolutionarily beneficial.

[–] chetradley@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

Absolutely. I was just responding to OP's examples which all feature men.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I feel like every time out of academia I hear about evolutionary biology it's always something turbo sexist.

[–] chetradley@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Are you talking about my comment specifically, or in general?

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

General thought brought on by your comment

It should be noted that evolution doesn't care about individuals, so not only behavior which increases an individuals chances of having children are incentivized. Evolution happens in a population, which is why it is advantageous for a group to have selfless traits.

[–] GrymEdm@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 8 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

George R.R. Martin - It really is all cocks in the end

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] Philycheezstake@lemmy.one 51 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] pm_me_your_thoughts@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago

Anyone have sauce for the girl in the first picture? She hot /s

[–] dianea@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I was riding my motorcycle today. Not too many other ways to put two hundred horsepower between my legs

[–] SHOW_ME_YOUR_ASSHOLE@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

Love the feeling of a 500cc single slapping my taint 9000 times per minute.

[–] Assman@sh.itjust.works 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I get the last one. Hunched over a warm thing. Spraying liquid. That's basically what sex is.

[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

don't stop I'm almost there

[–] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Men only think about sex *in relation to women/relationships

Not that I follow that rhetoric but that the context when that phrase is uttered, often as a cautionary tale to young women.

[–] ZILtoid1991@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

I'm a man, and I can confirm this. Even in grave danger, I wish I was having sex. When I'm coding in D, I chuckle at it's name and thinking about what if I named my variables after sex jokes.