iii. nothing to make songs about but kings, helmets and swords; half-forgotten things // TEXT

Jun 26, 2011 13:23

failed filter to Rhade and Trip, and hence ENTIRELY PUBLIC;

What's the necessity of sexual intercourse?

teach me barge-sensei, saying everything inappropriate, what are the birds and bee

Leave a comment

[Private] majorum_pride June 26 2011, 15:32:14 UTC
And we, as Nietzscheans, have had all disease rendering genes removed from our DNA, as well as the addition of increased abilities. But good DNA is only a contributor to the successful rearing of a child.

Often attraction also comes from mental compatibility. Someone you would not superficially be attracted to can also become appealing after prolonged exposure. Sexual intercourse leads to the introduction of hormones into the system that encourage loyalty and protection between the pair. Protection that is then transferred to offspring, as well as imparting knowledge.

Essentially, the reactions it generates between the breeding pair produce a better and more involved environment for a child that is reared. They tend to become healthier, more creative and more analytical than if they simply receive raw input. They're physically healthier and the mortality rate of children is considerably lower. The offspring may be genetically engineered, but that's no reason for their parents to not have the same amount of involvement.

[He's not surprised Libria would do that. It's better for Collectives that their offspring not be capable of creativity.]

Any effects of physical union could probably be achieved with drugs as well. We simply prefer the stimulus and sense of physical union that accompanies the act.

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 27 2011, 09:13:12 UTC
There was no drug. Such a drug would have countered Prozium entirely. [ He pauses. ] So sexual intercourse is a... necessity in order to have better, healthier children?

[ Blinks. Headtilts. ]

I don't see anything wrong with Robbie and Liza.

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 27 2011, 13:53:20 UTC
Not a necessity. But it makes some of the child rearing instincts more effective.

Are Robbie and Liza your genetically engineered children? [He needs to check. They might be just a couple he knows.]

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 27 2011, 14:23:29 UTC
[ Bliiiinks. ]

Is sexual intercourse then necessary for the instincts to exist?

Yes. [ :3 ]

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 27 2011, 14:27:00 UTC
No, but the hormonal responses are to be fully effective. Ours have become increased due to our breeding.

Are they given prozium?

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 27 2011, 14:29:35 UTC
They were, from birth.

[ Pause. ]

They stopped taking it and hid it from me- some time. I'm not entirely sure of the duration. [ Then, firmly: ] There's nothing wrong with them.

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 27 2011, 14:34:47 UTC
It sounds like they were good at improvisation. [Though he doesn't like the idea of drugged children. Does not.]

In any case, all African apes, including humans, have some level of observed heterosexual and homosexual interest within their troupes. If you're feeling something, it's because your genes are telling you to. As a sapient being, you have the option of ignoring it.

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 27 2011, 15:24:55 UTC
'Repression'.

[ Blink. Then, a little sheepishly- ]

I read a few books at the library. That's why some of them called it.

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 27 2011, 15:32:00 UTC
Repression, yes. It's considered by some to be very destructive. The entire act of sex is a taboo subject in many cultures, usually even refrained from reference as if that might give it some justification to not restrain themselves. The emphasis on sex as an immoral act, however, is only an encouragement of self-control that becomes twisted into something psychologically damaging.

Repression really should only be a display of self-control. And then coping with those urges in other ways so that they're no longer repressed.

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 28 2011, 07:42:42 UTC
... Can you repeat that again? I... don't understand.

What makes it- immoral? And why would it be psychologically damaging?

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 28 2011, 07:46:31 UTC
It's not immoral. But many people would have you believe that it is as that is how they were taught. To be afraid of their own reactions. To be ashamed of responses that they can not help.

That's one way that it's damaging. Shame for things that you're unable to help or are no fault of your own is unhealthy and can affect you physically if you become depressed, yet it seems to be the center of many religions.

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 28 2011, 10:32:21 UTC
[ With finality: ]

The world here is complicated and contradictory.

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 28 2011, 15:06:12 UTC
Fortunately those aren't the beliefs of my people.

Reply

[Private] stecktimdetail June 29 2011, 09:31:14 UTC
Are they the primary beliefs here?

Reply

[Private] majorum_pride June 30 2011, 01:47:42 UTC
Honestly, I couldn't tell you what the primary beliefs are. While most may be humans, they're from so many differing times and universes and places that one majority is countered with a disagreement on something else.

Most of them are afraid of sex, though. Or having it used against them.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up