Tuesday, April 09, 2013

Because Anthony Keeps Poking

Libertarian Sexuality, Part 1: Human Sexual Behavior 101

by Anthony Pacheco

The Question:

We know authors portray libertarian societies as monogamous with a side of polygamy. Are m+n/f long-term relationship, where one woman has multiple husbands (defined as polyandry), possible?


Absolutely. A libertarian society would see these types of LTRs, which occurs throughout human history and also in the animal kingdom. I’m here to talk about a hypothetical future, however. This is a three-part series:

  • Human Sexual Behavior 101

  • The Present: Doom, Doom, & More Doom

  • A Libertarian Future: Monogamy, Polyandry & Polygamy

  • Explanation:

    To understand how polyandry works in humans, let's define human behaviors outside of gender-relational wishful thinking. In other words, jettison current Western Feminism Dogma for the false-dichotomy it is and deal with facts.

    Yeah, I went there.

    The Basics of Human Sexuality Without Dogmatic Politically Correct BS

    We can divide this discussion right along the sexes: the male imperative and the female imperative.

    The Male Imperative

    The male imperative is amazingly obvious but modern men and women both attempt to ignore or marginalize the basis of human sexuality. Sperm is not just cheap, biologically speaking, its way cheap. Sperm is so plentiful a male human will jettison the excess through masturbation.

    Therefore, a human male is good to go when he can find a female willing to engage in intercourse. The more attractive the male is, the more females he can engage to deposit his genetic material into (we’ll talk about this later). Men not as attractive can also, through the pair-bounding process with a woman, create a monogamous relationship where the female is only interested in engaging sex with him despite her feminine imperative.

    They call it making love for a reason. A woman attracted to a man she gets high off a dopamine response. During intercourse, if the man brings the woman to climax she not only receives genetic material she receives an oxytocin punch to her neural response system.

    Literally, the male is drugging his mate with love, a one-two punch of biological epic proportions and the foundation of the pair-bounding process. If backed by cultural reinforcement, what also makes up monogamy and life-time mating.

    Why discuss the mechanics of sex specifically impacting women? In the men's section?

    That’s the male imperative. To have sex. We’ll come back to this later.

    The Female Imperative

    The female imperative is hypergamy.

    Hypergamy is the biological feminine drive to mate and secure commitment from a man whose relative attractiveness to her is higher than her own attractiveness. In different words, mate selection is the genetic drive to produce the best offspring she can.

    Not only is this feminine imperative, but a duality inherent in all women. They seek sex and commitment. A man can impregnate a woman with little biological commitment. A woman, however, once impregnated, not only consumes more resources than when not, but she is also "spending" her body in a nine month pregnancy followed by, by modern standards, eighteen years of child-raising commitment.

    A woman lies on her back, spreads her legs and offers a man her sex: this is a biological offer for a man to ride in the ultimate luxury car. It could be a short ride or the ride of his life, but for a woman sex is an impending biological sacrifice on an epic scale.

    This sacrifice is so foundational to a woman's make up hypergamy is akin to a woman breathing and an undeniable sexual drive rooted in life and death. Without hypergamy a woman could invest her entire life and offspring to a sub-standard male of lower genetic status. Not too long ago, mating with the wrong man meant death.

    Many say bad bad things about hypergamy, but biology doesn’t care. Many also define hypergamy as "marrying up." That is a simplistic definition of the female imperative.

    Hypergamy is the biological force in a woman which dramatically reduces her chance of getting knocked up by a douche-bag who cannot provide for her and her offspring nor keep them safe. She snaps her legs closed. She does not offer the man a ride in her Lexus. She tells him to go pork a Pinto.

    Strong as the female imperative is, it is not wishful thinking to recognize the pair-bonding process will dampen a woman’s drive to replace one man with a better one, as long as her current mate remains attractive to her. Making love is a giant, orgasmic sex drug for a woman (and men, but that's a different story) and can turn her into a slut. She is a monogamous slut only for her man because of her biological drive, as long as she perceives qualities in him which are better than her own.

    But it’s serial. As soon as her mate ceases to be attractive to her, all bets are off. Hypergamy kicks in, and with a vengeance. Remember, the woman is deciding to make a life-altering biological change. Why would she make babies with someone she isn’t attracted to and repulsed by? This directly translates to DON’T HAVE SEX. This DON’T HAVE SEX bit has many names. The Friend Zone. Divorce. Serial Monogamy. I Love You But I Am Not In Love With You™. Whatever you call it, thy name is legion:

    Hypergamy. The feminine imperative.

    Biology Doesn’t Care

    We’ve talked about love but only from a biological standpoint in the pair-bounding process. I didn’t talk about romantic love because biology doesn’t care. Biology doesn’t care about a lot of things and that coupled with this factoid this post serves as the foundation for understanding human sexuality. This seems simple and is simple. Humans are highly adaptive. Genetics roots this species specific trait in cold-hard reality.

    Let’s go over some examples. One classic misunderstood example is birth control.

    Mr. and Mrs. Biology Scoff at Your Scientific Advancements

    A woman can choose when to get pregnant. This ushered in a sexual revolution, right?

    Wrong. Evolutionary biology doesn’t care about birth control, at least not yet. All sex, for a woman’s brain, is make-a-baby-sex. All. If she has sex while ovulating the female brain goes "We’re making a baby! Yeah!" Before ovulation, her brain goes "Wooooo! Give me some of this white stuff because it sticks around for five days!" So-on-and-so-forth.

    The emotional response to sex is not the body saying, "Well, this is sex and I’m ovulating, but because I have a diaphragm in, I won’t get pregnant. Let’s not pair-bound, Ms. Body, either, despite the fact I’ve had three orgasms and this guys is hot, because I’m still working on my B.A."

    A woman’s hormonal system will care she is on the pill. Behavior traits based on millions of years of sexuality don’t.

    Let’s talk about the other side of the coin, men.

    Mr. and Mrs. Biology Don't Give Rip if You Think Objectification is Bad

    Today, many tell men to not objectify women because that’s sexist and ultimately misogynistic. Objectification, they say, is the moral basis for patriarchal systems and everything bad in men.

    Despite evidence of evolutionary traits men find attractive, somehow a man must ignore the massive amounts of testosterone in his body (as compared to a woman) and the theory of evolution and not objectify a woman he just met?

    Ignoring women also initially objectify men they desire, for men, the pair-bounding process replaces objectivity with idealistic notions of romance and love (much more so for men than women!). Yet somehow initial attraction, wanting (not necessarily doing but simply wanting) sex with nubile Katie without getting to know her is bad.

    Biology doesn’t care. Biology doesn’t care about the "unfairness" of Katie's long legs and big boobs while Sally is an A cup and therefore men should appreciate Sally just as much as Katie. It’s not supposed to be fair. It’s the male imperative. If a woman thinks this is bad, that's her problem. Not his.

    Get it?

    I end this post with a rational examination at sex-attributed behaviors and not a moralistic approach because in the next, we'll expose all the dirty laundry. My mantra as we look at the current state before moving to a future state of monogamy, polyandry and polygamy roots itself in this notion:

    The human brain is a meat computer. Emotions and feelings are tangible things running around a brain like software. Evolutionary biology is the runtime basis defining how the brain runs these programs.

    No sacred cow will be safe in the next post. Hold on to yer butts.

    From Girl to Woman

    Libertarian Sexuality, Part 1: Human Sexual Behavior 101, first appeared in Who Said Pixies Are Rational Creatures? in April 2013. For more information on Anthony Pacheco and his books, please visit his website.


    Anonymous said...

    Is this one of Occasional Reader's posts?

    It's really not very funny.

    Anonymous said...

    Strongly disapprove of the crude, simplistic and sexist characterisation of Katie.

    What is her phone number?

    Anthony said...

    3:57 PM Anonymous, I almost spit out my coffee, heh, heh.

    Her number is 425-867-5309.

    Harry H said...

    I have got to read that book. My local Barnes & Noble did not have it. I guess I'll have to order it online.

    Anthony said...

    Harry, you can order my book from any Barnes and Noble bookstore. Simply go to their customer service desk and have them order it. My distributor is used by almost every bookstore in the US.

    You just won't find it on the shelves.

    Note, however, it's just as fast to order it online. You can find links for buying the book at my website.

    Sha'el, Princess of Pixies said...

    Do I get a nice advanced reading copy of the next one? Not that i'm greedy or anything ...

    Anthony said...

    There is a SUPER SHORT window between revision and publication so there isn't an ARC cycle.

    I do do beta readers, but only if the reader promises to give me feedback.

    Finally, I can be bribed. :p

    It will be available this spring, so there isn't a lot of wait!

    Post a Comment