RaspberryLemon
Posts: 422
Joined: 7/18/2011 Status: offline
|
Wow. Talk about a shitstorm. I should probably not get involved because I hate this sort of thing, but my inner psychology geek is kicking me to respond, so here goes. The problem here is that this whole argument (from most if not all sides) is riddled with these: Most prevalently, in my opinion, #3 on the list. I think that there are other explanations. Yes. Procreation of a species is the entire (biological) purpose of their being. But that is not the only thing that makes up an individual. I am not trying to justify the argument of spirituality (it's not my cup of tea) but the intellectual, personality, and behavioral. Someone earlier brought up Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maslow%27s_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svg If you will notice, sex is one of the most basic--at the bottom of the pyramid. But it is possible that for some people, the D/s dynamic of their relationship or their submission/dominance is not based in the sex. It is possible that for them it satisfies another need such as security or safety or belonging (things that become important to us as humans when our most basic needs are already met, and mind you not everyone's drive for sex is the same so for some, little to no actual sexual action is required to fulfill that need.) It is also worth taking into account that dominance or submission is or at least can be a personality trait, something that is tied to their biology and genetics but is also created environmentally over time, i.e. not purely biological but intellectual as well. Our personality is related to our most basic needs, which essentially you can call "sustenance of life." A person, or animal, develops a pattern of behavior (personality) based on how the environment (physical and social) responded to their behavior. Since every living thing experiences a slightly different "environment" (experiences in its lifetime,) every living thing develops a pattern of behaving differently. This is relevant in saying that dominance and submission, as dynamics in a relationship, are (or can be) traits that develop because they worked successfully for the individual in question--they, at some point in their life, developed the tendency to behave this certain way because they received positive feedback in some form. Successful feedback is essential to an individual's "sustenance of life," in the way that the individual learns to behave that way to live. To procreate, one must exist and live and sustain that life. So really, it is not a question of what is "deeper," because it is all related--think of it linearly, as a flat, one dimensional plane rather than a shape that encompasses depth. As such it's not "just" about sex (or at least, it doesn't have to be--for some, it is), but yes, it does involve it, as a lot of things do on some basic level. There's no "right" way. EDIT: I would also like to add this: Humans being a sentient species, that is a big reason why people here (and in other threads containing similar subject matter) are answering this question taking into account mostly intellectual factors, not looking at the biological factors. We are already aware of the influence of our biology as hard fact, so when asked a question pointed at something that takes into account personal opinion, we answer it from the intellectual/personal standpoint.
< Message edited by RaspberryLemon -- 8/3/2011 1:34:01 AM >
|