Procrastination and Ruminations
This is essentially for my own purposes to ensure that I have a location for this essay. I first read the following essay when I was a Junior in college. The class was working on developing a HyperText, so I had also commented on the essay. Recently, the premise behind the essay (and my response) came crawling back into my psyche. I hunted down my English professor in college and he sent me a copy of the essay.
The Future of Reproductive Delay
by Ed Klonoski
In the latest breakthrough on the reproductive front scientists have
successfully impregnated postmenopausal women using eggs from younger
women and hormone replacement therapy. Four of the seven women in the
experiment gave birth to healthy offspring, one failed to conceive, one
miscarried and one had a stillborn infant. Those are the facts, but
what fascinates is how we continue to increase the gap between when our
organism is ready to reproduce and when we actually do. Commentators
have scoffed at postmenopausal pregnancy. After all, these voices point out, how many forty and fifty year old women are going to want to
reproduce? But given the difficulty of attaining economic security, I
suspect more than one might think.
But will the next generation accept such reproductive delays? We baby
boomers did not know we wouldn't reproduce until our thirties; things
just worked out that way. But every day in the classroom I face young
people who are not happy about how long it takes to carve out livings
for themselves. They know that it will be a long time before they are
economically prepared to support a family.
But do you know who is the largest group of new parents after the thirty something generation? Teenagers. That's right; kids without
educations, jobs, or gray hairs are reproducing, and we are aghast.
Here science keeps extending the upper limits of fertility in order to
lengthen the preparation period for parenthood and these reckless
teenagers just do it. They just plunge right into reproduction without
a second thought. Why?
With puberty beginning in the early teens, but reproduction delayed
twenty to thirty years, Western culture is increasingly out of sync with its biological timetable. We are increasing the delay between when our organism is ready to reproduce and when our intellect tells us we should. And while we have bequeathed delayed reproduction to the next generation, few social commentators have admitted the considerable
weapons allied against it, not the least of which is the hormonal game plan of the human organism.
Some say that our sex drive is just another appetite, like a craving for candy, and if we just don't look at pictures of unwrapped Hershey bars, we won't desire chocolate. What these proponents of sexual self-control fail to understand is hormones; what they don't admit is the biological power of the instinct to reproduce. During adolescence, bodies aren't preparing for college, they are prepared for reproduction. Our organism's timetable hasn't changed to match the increased social complexity with which we uneasily coexist. In other words, once the hormonal green light comes on, the organism is ready. Delaying reproduction resists that biological imperative, and we accomplish it only with great difficulty.
So the first weapon employed against delayed reproduction is the male
arousal state. Most men remember being 16 and in full sexual arousal
over the suggestive curve of a grinder roll. We remember waking up
alone in our beds unable to sleep because of some poorly understood
excitation. We have not forgotten, only repressed, those years when our hormones were driving and our cerebellum was just along for the ride.
Repressing our reproductive drive has its roots in St. Augustine's
argument that sex is part of man's animal nature and must be
suppressed/confessed if man is to become the proper spiritual creature
he was meant to be. In a sense Augustine was right; our sexual urge has its roots deep in a primitive part of our brain. We were reproducing hundreds of millennia before we developed a cerebellum that could classify religious ecstasy as acceptable and sexual ecstasy as
unacceptable.
I'm here to remind everyone that the drive to procreate is one of our
few instincts, and the male arousal state is essential to it. If we
copulated only enough to keep the species replenished, St. Augustine
would never have reviled human sexuality the way he did (after a youth
spent in licentious pursuits he knew the attraction of the carnality
first hand), but that isn't the way arousal works. The male organism
comes equipped with hormones that keep driving it, and these hormonal
messages can be overwhelming to young people. During arousal they may
forget their social security number, their job prospects, even their
condoms, as a more primitive "memory" takes control, leaving every nerve quivering, every juice flowing, every brain function serving this
ancient ache for release. So the first difficulty with reproductive
delay is the power of the male arousal state itself.
But society also misunderstands how deeply young people love. When I
ask my students if they have been in love, many answer yes. When I ask
them where these loves are headed, they grimace. Our young adults do
love. And love leads naturally to relationships and reproduction, or at least the desire for children. But young people are forced to choose between their hearts and their heads, between loving and playing at love. This unnatural choice causes the young people I meet tremendous pain. Babies after menopause are the latest step down the path of reproductive delay, but can we continue to hope that future generations will accept such unnatural delay?
The answer is obvious: we must more closely meet the reproductive
timetable our species has developed over the eons. To start, we cannot
expect our young people to successfully delay reproduction without
honestly confronting the power of the arousal state. We must explain
just how overwhelming arousal can be, especially in adolescent males
whose hormones are firing on all cylinders.
But we must also admit the difficulty of reproductive delay to those who see it staring them in the face. My college freshman understand that they have reluctantly made a commitment to babies in their thirties, but they don't like it. Reading about postmenopausal fertility does not encourage them to stay the course. Wouldn't we be better served offering them hope that they will be able to interrupt their careers to reproduce? Isn't that what we must do if we expect them to strive for excellence? At the very least we should stop pretending that sexuality and love are not connected to the organism's instinct for reproduction.
Give sex back its biological power; give love back its reproductive dreams.
Anyone is, of course, welcome to comment regarding their thoughts on the essay. My intention, when I have time, is to write an updated reaction to this essay.
The Future of Reproductive Delay
by Ed Klonoski
In the latest breakthrough on the reproductive front scientists have
successfully impregnated postmenopausal women using eggs from younger
women and hormone replacement therapy. Four of the seven women in the
experiment gave birth to healthy offspring, one failed to conceive, one
miscarried and one had a stillborn infant. Those are the facts, but
what fascinates is how we continue to increase the gap between when our
organism is ready to reproduce and when we actually do. Commentators
have scoffed at postmenopausal pregnancy. After all, these voices point out, how many forty and fifty year old women are going to want to
reproduce? But given the difficulty of attaining economic security, I
suspect more than one might think.
But will the next generation accept such reproductive delays? We baby
boomers did not know we wouldn't reproduce until our thirties; things
just worked out that way. But every day in the classroom I face young
people who are not happy about how long it takes to carve out livings
for themselves. They know that it will be a long time before they are
economically prepared to support a family.
But do you know who is the largest group of new parents after the thirty something generation? Teenagers. That's right; kids without
educations, jobs, or gray hairs are reproducing, and we are aghast.
Here science keeps extending the upper limits of fertility in order to
lengthen the preparation period for parenthood and these reckless
teenagers just do it. They just plunge right into reproduction without
a second thought. Why?
With puberty beginning in the early teens, but reproduction delayed
twenty to thirty years, Western culture is increasingly out of sync with its biological timetable. We are increasing the delay between when our organism is ready to reproduce and when our intellect tells us we should. And while we have bequeathed delayed reproduction to the next generation, few social commentators have admitted the considerable
weapons allied against it, not the least of which is the hormonal game plan of the human organism.
Some say that our sex drive is just another appetite, like a craving for candy, and if we just don't look at pictures of unwrapped Hershey bars, we won't desire chocolate. What these proponents of sexual self-control fail to understand is hormones; what they don't admit is the biological power of the instinct to reproduce. During adolescence, bodies aren't preparing for college, they are prepared for reproduction. Our organism's timetable hasn't changed to match the increased social complexity with which we uneasily coexist. In other words, once the hormonal green light comes on, the organism is ready. Delaying reproduction resists that biological imperative, and we accomplish it only with great difficulty.
So the first weapon employed against delayed reproduction is the male
arousal state. Most men remember being 16 and in full sexual arousal
over the suggestive curve of a grinder roll. We remember waking up
alone in our beds unable to sleep because of some poorly understood
excitation. We have not forgotten, only repressed, those years when our hormones were driving and our cerebellum was just along for the ride.
Repressing our reproductive drive has its roots in St. Augustine's
argument that sex is part of man's animal nature and must be
suppressed/confessed if man is to become the proper spiritual creature
he was meant to be. In a sense Augustine was right; our sexual urge has its roots deep in a primitive part of our brain. We were reproducing hundreds of millennia before we developed a cerebellum that could classify religious ecstasy as acceptable and sexual ecstasy as
unacceptable.
I'm here to remind everyone that the drive to procreate is one of our
few instincts, and the male arousal state is essential to it. If we
copulated only enough to keep the species replenished, St. Augustine
would never have reviled human sexuality the way he did (after a youth
spent in licentious pursuits he knew the attraction of the carnality
first hand), but that isn't the way arousal works. The male organism
comes equipped with hormones that keep driving it, and these hormonal
messages can be overwhelming to young people. During arousal they may
forget their social security number, their job prospects, even their
condoms, as a more primitive "memory" takes control, leaving every nerve quivering, every juice flowing, every brain function serving this
ancient ache for release. So the first difficulty with reproductive
delay is the power of the male arousal state itself.
But society also misunderstands how deeply young people love. When I
ask my students if they have been in love, many answer yes. When I ask
them where these loves are headed, they grimace. Our young adults do
love. And love leads naturally to relationships and reproduction, or at least the desire for children. But young people are forced to choose between their hearts and their heads, between loving and playing at love. This unnatural choice causes the young people I meet tremendous pain. Babies after menopause are the latest step down the path of reproductive delay, but can we continue to hope that future generations will accept such unnatural delay?
The answer is obvious: we must more closely meet the reproductive
timetable our species has developed over the eons. To start, we cannot
expect our young people to successfully delay reproduction without
honestly confronting the power of the arousal state. We must explain
just how overwhelming arousal can be, especially in adolescent males
whose hormones are firing on all cylinders.
But we must also admit the difficulty of reproductive delay to those who see it staring them in the face. My college freshman understand that they have reluctantly made a commitment to babies in their thirties, but they don't like it. Reading about postmenopausal fertility does not encourage them to stay the course. Wouldn't we be better served offering them hope that they will be able to interrupt their careers to reproduce? Isn't that what we must do if we expect them to strive for excellence? At the very least we should stop pretending that sexuality and love are not connected to the organism's instinct for reproduction.
Give sex back its biological power; give love back its reproductive dreams.
Anyone is, of course, welcome to comment regarding their thoughts on the essay. My intention, when I have time, is to write an updated reaction to this essay.