Evolution of Human Sexuality

Evolution of Sexuality:

Everything evolves.

Human sexuality is the capacity to have erotic experiences and responses.[1] A person's sexual orientation may influence their sexual interest and attraction for another person.[2] Sexuality can have biological, emotional/physical or spiritual aspects. The biological aspect of sexuality refers to the reproductive mechanism as well as the basic biological drive that exists in all species, which is hormonally controlled. The emotional or physical aspect of sexuality refers to the bond that exists between individuals, and is expressed through profound feelings or physical manifestations of emotions of love, trust, and caring. There is also a spiritual aspect of sexuality of an individual or as a connection with others. Sexuality impacts and is impacted by cultural, political, legal, and philosophical aspects of life. It can refer to issues of morality, ethics, theology, spirituality, or religion. Some cultures have been described as sexually repressive.
Interest in sexual activity typically increases when an individual reaches puberty.[3] Some researchers assume that sexual behavior is determined by genetics, and others assert that it is molded by the environment.[4] This is the nature versus nurture debate, in which one can define nature as those behavioral traits that are due to innate characteristics, such as instincts and drives. The concept of nurture can be defined as the environmental factors or external stimuli that influence behavior, emotions, and thinking.[5] Biological and physical differences include the human sexual response cycle among men and women.[6]
Evolutionary perspectives on human coupling and/or reproduction, including the sexual strategies theory, provide another perspective on sexuality,[7] as does social learning theory.[8] Socio-cultural aspects of sexuality include historical developments and religious beliefs, including Jewish views on sexual pleasure within the marriage and Christian views on avoidance of sexual pleasures.[6] The study of sexuality also includes human identity within social groups, sexually transmitted infections (STIs/STDs) and birth control methods.

Nature-versus-nurture debate[edit]
Main article: Nature versus nurture
Certain characteristics are believed to be innate in humans, although they may be modified by interactions with the physical and social environment.[9] Human sexuality is driven by genetics and mental activity. Normative characteristics, as well as social, cultural, educational, and environmental characteristics of an individual also moderate the sexual drive.[10] The sexual drive affects the development of personal identity[10] and many social activities.[11] There are two well-known theorists who formed the opposing positions in the nature versus nurture debate. Sigmund Freud, a firm supporter of the nature argument, believed that sexual drives are instinctive and viewed sexuality as the central source of human personality. John Locke, on the other hand, believed in the nurture argument, using his theory of the mind being seen as a "tabula rasa" or blank slate, the environment in which one develops drives their sexuality.[12]
Thomas Aquinas[edit]
Medieval philosopher Thomas Aquinas held sexuality in accordance with virtues such as temperance and charity not to be evil in itself: "If we suppose the corporeal nature to be created by the good God we cannot hold that those things which pertain to the preservation of the corporeal nature and to which nature inclines, are altogether evil; wherefore, since the inclination to beget an offspring whereby the specific nature is preserved is from nature, it is impossible to maintain that the act of begetting children is altogether unlawful, so that it be impossible to find the mean of virtue therein; unless we suppose, as some are mad enough to assert, that corruptible things were created by an evil god, whence perhaps the opinion mentioned in the text is derived (Sent. iv, D, 26); wherefore this is a most wicked heresy."[13]
The virtue of temperance tempers excess in acts and habits according to Aristotle and Aquinas's virtue ethics, where the aim is not necessarily total abstinence (although Aquinas holds this as easier to achieve), but a perfect mean according to good (i.e. such things as virtue, reason, natural law, Divine Law, and intelligence). Hence, chastity[14] and the habit of virginity, defined as "the continual meditation on incorruption in a corruptible flesh" are the parts of the virtue temperance related to sexuality,[15] and are opposed by excess by lust. Aquinas argues that a reasoned use of sexuality should be according to its end, which is human procreation, again in accordance with charity and other virtues, i.e. "true good":
"A sin, in human acts, is that which is against the order of reason. Now the order of reason consists in its ordering everything to its end in a fitting manner. Wherefore it is no sin if one, by the dictate of reason, makes use of certain things in a fitting manner and order for the end to which they are adapted, provided this end be something truly good. Now just as the preservation of the bodily nature of one individual is a true good, so, too, is the preservation of the nature of the human species a very great good. And just as the use of food is directed to the preservation of life in the individual, so is the use of venereal acts directed to the preservation of the whole human race. Hence Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xvi): "What food is to a man's well being, such is sexual intercourse to the welfare of the whole human race." Wherefore just as the use of food can be without sin, if it be taken in due manner and order, as required for the welfare of the body, so also the use of venereal acts can be without sin, provided they be performed in due manner and order, in keeping with the end of human procreation."
Aquinas reckons lust to be a "mortal sin" and a "capital vice." The daughters, or consequences, of lust are described as "blindness of mind, thoughtlessness, inconstancy, rashness, self-love, hatred of God, love of this world and abhorrence or despair of a future world."[16] Moreover, as with any "mortal sin," Aquinas reckons that lust destroys the charity, and consequently also the happiness, in humans.[17]
Sigmund Freud[edit]
Freud's theory assumed that behavior was rooted in biology. He proposed that instincts are the principal motivating forces in the mental realm, and held that there are a large number of instincts but that they are reduced into two broad groups; Eros (the life instinct), which covers all the self-preserving and erotic instincts, and Thanatos (the death instinct), which covers instincts toward aggression, self-destruction, and cruelty.[18] Freud gave sexual drives a centrality in human life, actions, and behaviors that had not been accepted before his proposal. His instinct theory suggested that humans are driven from birth by the desire to acquire and enhance bodily pleasures, thus supporting the nature debate. Freud successfully redefined the term "sexuality" to make it cover any form of pleasure that can be derived from the human body,[18] raised the notion that the pre-genital zones are primitive areas of preliminary enjoyment preceding sexual intercourse and orgasm.[19] He reasoned that pleasure lowers tension, while displeasure raises it, influencing the sexual drive in humans. His developmentalist perspective was governed by inner forces, especially biological drives and maturation, and his view that humans are biologically inclined to seek sexual gratification demonstrates the nature side of the debate.[12]
John Locke[edit]
Locke (1632 – 1704) rejected the assumption that there are innate differences among people, and argued that people are shaped strongly by their social environments, especially by education.[12] He believed that it would be accurate to view a child’s mind as a tabula rasa or blank slate; whatever goes into the mind will come from the surrounding environment.[12] As the person develops, they discover their identity. Locke proposed to follow a child from its birth and observe the changes that time makes, saying that one will find that as the mind, through sensory information, becomes furnished with ideas, it becomes more awake and aware. He said that after some time, the child’s mind begins to know the objects which are most familiar. As the child’s brain develops, he or she begins to know the people and social surroundings of daily life and can then distinguish the known from the unknown. This view supports the nurture side of the debate.[20] Locke believed that there are no natural obstructions that would block the development of children's inherent potential for acting freely and rationally and that everyone is born to become independent beings and benefit from the environment.[21]
Human sexual behavior is different from the sexual behavior of most other animal species, in that it seems to be affected by several factors. For example, while most non-human species are driven to partake in sexual behavior when reproduction is possible, humans are not sexually active just for the sake of reproduction.[22] The environment, culture, and social setting play major roles in the perception, attitudes, and behaviors of sexuality. Sexual behavior is also affected by the inability to detect sexual stimuli, incorrect labeling, or misattribution. This may in turn impede an individual’s sexual performance.[22]