All behavior and beliefs of self-conscious humans can be explained in
reference to two biological principles:
1. each person behaves in a manner that is advantageous either to his
genes or his self-conscious mind
2. humans have a great capability to adapt to changing situations
Though this point is seldom stressed, we have to be aware of a conflict
between the interests of each person’s genes and each person’s
self-conscious mind.
From the perspective of a person’s genes, all is advantageous that
aides in the procreation of these genes (in plain terms: what achieves the
best procreative success). However, the interests of the self-conscious
mind may be different.
Our genes have primed us to sacrifice ourselves for our offspring. We
therefore have been equipped, since long before we became
self-conscious, with the emotions of both, sexual desire and parental love.
The self-conscious mind, however, can well conclude that the
self-sacrifice would be in the benefit of the offspring, but not in the benefit
of the person sacrificing himself.
Would you save your only three children if it meant your own death?
Assume that your sacrifice would definitely save them. Assume furthermore
that your own destruction would be certain.
You do not have to answer the question. It only serves the purpose to
illustrate that the interests of the genes and the interests of the
self-conscious mind must not always be identical.
I would define a gentle death, and before that, a life of optimal
sexual satisfaction, as interests of the self-conscious mind. The interests
of the genes are not that sophisticated: they simply are procreation,
at any cost and suffering for the person who transports these genes.
Now, if only procreation is used as the measure of success, the agenda
of the genes works much better than the one of the self-conscious mind,
disregarding the suffering it causes.
The interest in the absence of suffering is much stronger for the
self-conscious mind than it is for the genes.
A person’s genes and a person’s self-conscious mind can dictate vastly
different behavioral patters, and the conflict between the two
typically is more pronounced in women than it is in men.
A man’s self-conscious mind desires optimal sexual satisfaction, which
needs a considerable variety of sexual partners. Incidentally,
optimizing his sexual satisfaction by changing sexual partners also potentially
is in the interest of his genes. Men theoretically can sire a child
every day, or more than once a day.
For a woman, pursuing optimal sexual satisfaction with a considerable
variety of sexual partners would potentially run against the interest of
her genes. The best setting for a woman’s genes through tens of
thousands of years has been to be careful in choosing a sexual partner and
having sexual contact only with a man who would then be a committed
father.
From women, more than from men, genes would also demand a higher
willingness to sacrifice herself for the benefit of her children, not just in
situations when there is acute danger, but in everyday situations.
After all, children, especially small children, need constant attention and
care.
Thus, it is quite natural that in all historical and pre-historical
societies that were not based on communal childcare, those genes
procreated best which primed women to display the following characteristics:
1. the ability to control sexual desires in favor of partner committed
to their offspring
2. a general willingness to sacrifice personal freedom in favor of
increased chances of offspring survival
I am not aware of historic societies in which communal childcare was
practiced for the purpose of freeing women from parenting
responsibilities. If they existed, they were obviously not very successful in
competing with societies in which parents, mainly mothers, took care of
children.
For this reason, it is no surprise that any empirical study of “what
women want” in societies around the world arrives at the conclusion that
women are much more inclined towards monogamy than are men. This
inclination towards monogamy is a definite result, quite possibly even
genetically expressed, of the social circumstances under which humans
procreated (only caring mothers who could keep their polygamous inclinations
at bay could achieve a good offspring survival).
It does not mean that in previous societies, just as in current
societies, there would not have been a large number of women who would have
had a strong inclination towards enjoying sexual contact with a large
number of men for the purpose of optimal sexual satisfaction. It’s just
that their behavior wasn’t preserved well from generation to generation,
as children from such mothers didn’t survive as easily as did those who
would forgo sexual satisfaction for the benefit of their children.
Humans have a great capability to adapt to changing situations, both
genetically and behaviorally. Genetic adaptations for which there is a
compelling reason can happen over just a few generations. Behavioral
adaptations can happen in a society over just a few years.
But that women are genetically primed to control their desire for
optimal sexual satisfaction doesn’t mean that their sexual desires would
have been reduced. This would not even be in the interest of her genes.
The interest of her genes would be that as soon as there is no child to
sacrifice her sexual desire for, the sexual desire will be there in full
force, and not necessarily be directed towards just one man.
For the self-conscious mind, an ideology of optimal sexual
satisfaction, followed by a gentle death, makes as much sense for women as it does
for men. The ideology for women would not have to be limited sexual
satisfaction, followed by a gentle death.
To allow female behavioral adaptations that will result in a higher
degree of sexual satisfaction for both females and males, a number of
measures would have to be implemented within societies. These include:
1. No stigmatization of women who have sexual contact without being
married.
2. The dissociation of sexual conduct and childbearing. Any birth
control measure for any person from any age.
3. The minimization of the financial burden on women who have children.
Either fathers are compelled to provide financial security, or the
state provides support.
4. No stigmatization of sexual relationships of people of different
age. Especially sexual relationships of women with much younger men ought
not to be discriminated against.
5. A much increased acceptability of the fact that older partners in
sexual relationships provide economic support to younger partners.
This is not a complete list of policies that should be implemented to
reduce the pressure of society on women to conform to the monogamous
role model of just limited sexual satisfaction (which anyway is just an
adaptation to unfavorable social conditions).
