In fact, archeologists don’t know who carved these figurines or why. All we can guess with reasonable probability is that sex was on someone’s mind, which comes as no surprise. Thirty-five thousand years ago is about the time that our direct Cro-Magnon ancestors were displacing Neanderthals in Europe. They had something going for them – more agile minds? language? imagination? Maybe the source of their success was not reproductive efficiency, as such, but eroticism. That is to say, maybe the conceptualization of sex was a driving engine of cerebral facility and language. The Playboy bunny. The Harlequin romance. Foreplay. Dirty dancing. Maybe sexual fantasy prepared the way for art and religion and technological innovation. Maybe the brain evolved as a sexual organ, and then found other things to do.”
On returning home, he breathlessly informed his mother,”There were 2 boy kittens and 2 girl kittens.”
How did you know?” his mother asked.
“Daddy picked them up and looked underneath,” he replied. “I think it’s printed on the bottom.”
I eat, I breathe, I laugh, I cry, I pee; all bodily functions and reactions.
Is sex not just another bodily function?
Why has sex become sacred? Along with peeing and pooing, of course because they involve sex organs.
I read this article in The Guardian:
Does sex have to be ‘sacred’ to be meaningful?
The headmaster of Wellington College has criticised young people’s attitudes to sex, calling it a ‘sacred act’. Do you agree?
Is sex being transformed into just the “latest teenage app” by the increased availability of contraceptive implants and injections? Yes, according to Anthony Seldon, headmaster of Wellington College, who said so on the Today programme. Seldon claimed the fact that young people could now have sex “with impunity” was devaluing it. “It is the most sacred act that two human beings can have together,” he said. “Anything that trivilialises it or makes people think that this is just like shopping … is very emotionally damaging.”
Sex can be many things, depending on your perspective. Something functional, something fun, something sinful or something holy. Does it make any sense to try to define what sex “should” be? What form might “sacred” sex, of the kind Seldon describes, take? Can it ever come from casual encounters? Does a prescriptive take on sex do more harm than good?”
And that set me to thinking, why?
We’ve trivialised eating by eating junk food.
Why is sex put on this bloody great pedestal?
Sex is, has always been, a bit like shopping. Think about how one goes about finding a marriage partner; really, isn’t that just a bit like shopping?
I don’t find anything sinful in sex, nor do I find it holy nor sacred. Sex is fun, something to be enjoyed. The whole taboo about sex I find rather boring and puritan.
Why bother defining sex?
We hide our sex organs shamefully, dogs don’t, nor do they care about who their audience is when consummating their brief relationship.
We don’t curtail any other bodily function whilst awaiting a suitable partner. We are already a socially constipated species without adding physical constipation as well.
People like Anthony Sheldon and his ilk are the harbingers of so many of our social problems. I would suggest that if the mystery and taboo of sex were removed, we might just have a healthier society.
We’re too stuck up!