Some theories actually hold that this is closer to the sort of “natural” alignment of humans. Theory holds the orgasm is a way to incentivize reproduction. It’s a non survival based physically demanding task that puts us in a vulnerable position- and without biological drive to reproduce it is unlikely that ESPECIALLY more primitive humans would do it often if at all. But women tend to have a harder time achieving orgasm on average with a partner. One theory is that this is to incentivize the female to have multiple partners- increasing her odds of impregnation.
For most humans, a partners moaning increases arousal and speeds their finish- but a theory as to the evolution of that response is simple and observed in other species. The moan had several results. It signals other males a female who is willing to breed is nearby, this attracting more partners. The male partner knows other potentially dangerous males are on the way and he must finish quickly. If these other male partners are physically superior- theoretically better mates- they will overpower him if he doesn’t- which could also lead to a better genetic seed for a child.
So in theory- early human mating would be males seeking to experience orgasm, finding as many and any females they could to mate, and females having multiple partners. This would also contribute to parental confusion- a technique still practiced by certain human tribes as well as animal groups, in which no particular male can be certain who’s offspring it is and thus are less likely to kill offspring they see as “competing.”
It’s also theorized that the development of missionary position- uncommon in the animal kingdom, helped contribute to humans becoming attached to mates. Associating a particular mate with pleasant feelings. This and other shifts in culture and technology likely led to monogamy- a system where a single male was able to care for and protect their offspring and thus parental confusion became less necessary for survival of the species. A move away from collective parenting as technological advancements allowed humans to exist more isolated lives as family units.
My point wasn’t that we should all aspire to regress to a form of things that we moved out of thousands of years ago- it was simply a “fun fact” and a neat theory on the subject. Just as we likely shouldn’t regress in social development we likely shouldn’t stagnate either- but understanding an issue often requires self awareness, and self awareness often is enhanced through understanding why we do things and not simply that they exist.
I feel like both of these people would benefit from an honestly open relationship where they are together, but also see other people, and everyone involved knows this.
Comments