Sexuality Deus ex Machina

Sexuality is dangerous. It does not evolve, it governs evolution. It is a apathetic deus ex machina. It is the tail wagging the dog. It is oppressive. We all have conceptions of the good life. We all have hope for the future of the human race. Sexuality does not. Sexuality forces us to mate for symmetry and power. Symmetrical bodies and faces are the hope of the human race. We will solve world hunger, realize a society of equity and mutual respect, cure major diseases, ease suffering, and realize a better world as long as we keep breeding for symmetrical faces and bodies. Like fucking golden retrievers, like fucking show dogs. Are we just show dogs?

Every second we spend thinking about anything but breeding for symmetry infuriates sexuality. Every minute we spend helping our fellow man, solving a problem, doing anything but pursuing sex will bring great retributions from sexuality. Sexuality literally has men by the balls. It tortures us for every second not spent in its service. I can’t speak for the female perspective but I’m sure it’s no less oppressive.
We breed with mates for power. Money, muscles, cleverness, Machievellian prowess, anything that can help you force your will on others. We can speculate about the why, but it is just how sexuality works. Our rationalizations are irrelevant. Do we do it out of fear, do we all just want to have our way like fucking children, no. NO, it’s just sexuality. Sexuality does not need to justify itself, it simply is the way that it is. The future of humanity is breeding for the ability to force your will on others as sexuality has forced its will on us.
A thought of sexuality is not a thought of Free Will. Any act of Free Will is a blow to sexuality and vice versa. There are many aspects of the human being that are irrational and constrain Free Will. None of them is as powerful and pervasive as sexuality. Why are we not terrified of it, why do we not fight it. Why do we accept it as is and base our very essence on it. I am as guilty as the next human of this. I am nearly powerless against how it defined me as an individual. All I can do is be aware of it and and hate it. I’m not even sure how one would struggle against it. Sexuality is the best argument I have for giving up on the human experience.

But the alternative may be much worse. The world is a Hobbsian hell of toil and failure. Without sexuality, without love, what would be left to live for.

Sexuality and Love are one of the greatest driving forces of empathy. Romantic love gives us the desire to understand each other’s world perspectives. Love allows us to respect, enjoy, savor each other’s world experience. Love even make us love the process of understanding each other a joy, we call it intimacy. Would intimacy exist without love?

Sexuality and love is the greatest common bond humankind share. Almost all of us have sexual desires and romantic aspirations of some sort. Empathy stems from understanding another’s frame of mind. It cannot exist if our perspectives of the world are too different for imagination and reason to stem the gap. This is one of the few commonalities we can all bond over: we all want to be loved. It is likely that love can exist without sexuality, though it would be wildly different. The only examples we have are family love. We all know how the love for one’s mother is different than the most passionate romantic love we can recall. Family love is determined by genetics, romantic love is a choice, a much deeper expression of who we are. Perhaps this is responsible for the difference? Or is sexuality just as deterministic as genetics? Human sexuality is nothing if not mysterious. It seems pernicious but we have no idea how much we will lose by abandoning it. We may lose too much, more than we are willing to.

Transition from normative to empirical—>

After this discussion you may want to explore the nature of sexuality further. You can look at it from a liberal arts perspective (Freudian dev theory, gender theory, etc) or we can look at it from the perspective a physicist. The latter is my perspective. Life on Earth as we know it is whats known as a complex adaptive system. I mean it’s complex, in layman’s terms, because we can’t program a computer to replicate us. The adaptive part is that the system modifies itself over time. Evolution is the feedback loop that governs the trajectory of life on earth. Evolution is where sexuality enters the conversation – Sexual Selection. Sexual selection filters genes in and out of the human pool at points of breeding (this is easy to model mathematically for dominant genes, but hell when we factor in recessive genes vis a vis people fucking). Sexual selection is most of the equation of motion that takes us from initial conditions (primordial soup) to present conditions (humans). It’s the diagonals of the Hamiltonian Propagator, if you will. The other part is Natural Selection. This filters genes in and out of the human gene pool randomly with falling rocks, disease (disease is another complex adaptive system, again the mathematical issues with introducing it into the model is formidable), and basic survival needs. To get a better feel for how natural selection interacts with us consider life’s evolutionary trajectory if it developed on a different planet or with different laws of physics. Professor Lath and I had an interesting discussion about what life might look like at a quantum level. I pointed out that quantum laws smooth out into deterministic reliable Newtonian Laws at the exact scale that life developed on. I invoked the anthropic principle to show that life developed at this scale because Newtonian laws allow us to plan for falling rocks and I’m not sure a digestive system can be assembled when the position and momentum of protiens is not known. He greatly challenged my intuitions by explaining how in fact it may be reasonable to search for life at quantum scales. My imagination was stimulated greatly by imagining what Quantum Life might look like….. Certainly sexual selection and the concomitant sexual urges humans are born with are the more interesting part of the equation. More interestingly is to consider how sexual preferences shape how we breed and how we breed affects what genes future generations are born with. This selection of genes in turn affects the sexual preferences future generations are born with. Sexuality is a system that modifies itself over time.

The final thought I will leave here is that complex adaptive systems seem to naturally generate new complex adaptive systems. The complex adaptive system (CAS) of atomic bonding gave rise to the system of life. The CAS of life gave rise to the CAS of computers and early generation AIs.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s