Procreation or attraction (or both)

[Robbiebah]

Do men and women procreate because they are attracted to each other or would they still procreate if they weren't attracted to each other? I believe that the desire to successfully plant your seed is deeper than the desire for sexual gratification so that is mainly why we procreate (because we want too, not because we are inclined too in a sense).

What is your opinion on this?

 

[Flakez]

If it weren't for the pleasure derived from *** there wouldn't be this many humans. I don't think the desire to procreate is inherent, and it shouldn't be because there's a lot of people that shouldn't do it.

 

[Michelle]

The reply for your question is yes to both.
If a woman want to have a child she doesn't need love to do it. In a way or another the need to procreate can have different self excuses like " i love him so much so i will have a child with him" or " i am single and i choose a random man to have a child (with many criteria of choice from handsomness to intelligence)" or OMG is happening that i'm pregnant without my wish, i will keep the child for religious reasons (the real inner reason is her need to have the child) - these are examples that popped out in my mind but there is an infinite number of reasons.
Either way, a woman who want a child will be mother with or without love.
I talk only about women because if she doesnt want it, it will never happen. (The pregnant man is a movie fantasy)

 

[Robbiebah]

If it weren't for the pleasure derived from *** there wouldn't be this many humans. I don't think the desire to procreate is inherent, and it shouldn't be because there's a lot of people that shouldn't do it.

Ya well that's part of it but I'm talking about attraction to a women, is it inherent or is it derived from the first time we masturbated to one or first time we have *** with one. When I look at the hand I masturbate with and then at my other hand or foot I can sense intimacy with that hand since I always attempt to plant my seed in it (kind of makes me feel sick tbh).

I don't think so either, I think the knowledge on how to procreate is inherent but the more we grow the more our desire to procreate becomes. Not so much to bang a babe cause she got boobs ya feel me?

 

[Robbiebah]

The reply for your question is yes to both.
If a woman want to have a child she doesn't need love to do it. In a way or another the need to procreate can have different self excuses like " i love him so much so i will have a child with him" or " i am single and i choose a random man to have a child (with many criteria of choice from handsomness to intelligence)" or OMG is happening that i'm pregnant without my wish, i will keep the child for religious reasons (the real inner reason is her need to have the child) - these are examples that popped out in my mind but there is an infinite number of reasons.
Either way, a woman who want a child will be mother with or without love.
I talk only about women because if she doesnt want it, it will never happen. (The pregnant man is a movie fantasy)

Right so you don't believe the desire to procreate and sexual attraction are one in the same since you said women don't need "love" to do it so another question is where does sexual attraction come from or how does it arise? I believe it comes from our first experience with masturbation or *** but most masturbate first. We know how to procreate since it is built into us just like it is with every animal (they don't need to be taught) and I realized my first intimate connection was with my hand, some intimacy was generated to towards the thought of women but most physically went to my hand. Whenever I look at my hand lately and think about this I feel very sick which is why I'm going to stop! lol

 

[Punk Hazard]

I believe that the desire to successfully plant your seed is deeper than the desire for sexual gratification ?

7 billion ****ing people, and you think this applies to each and every one of them. Amazing.

No, I do not think that all people have that desire. Some people want to **** for pleasure more, some do because they want kids more. Both happen.

When I look at the hand I masturbate with and then at my other hand or foot I can sense intimacy with that hand since I always attempt to plant my seed in it (kind of makes me feel sick)

Oh never mind, you're trolling.

 

[Robbiebah]

7 billion ****ing people, and you think this applies to each and every one of them. Amazing.

No, I do not think that all people have that desire. Some people want to **** for pleasure more, some do because they want kids more. Both happen.



Oh never mind, you're trolling.

Lol I understand these subjects upset you but try and remain calm for you're own sake. What I meant was that one desire predates the other (making it deeper). I'm very aware that a lot of people (probably most) have *** for pleasure and a lot of people (probably most) have children because they want too not because *** feels good and that both desires are separate and wanting to have children runs deeper than sexual gratification.

You have much to learn Riker and tbh I don't think you're capable of learning much.

 

[Flakez]

Ya well that's part of it but I'm talking about attraction to a women, is it inherent or is it derived from the first time we masturbated to one or first time we have *** with one. When I look at the hand I masturbate with and then at my other hand or foot I can sense intimacy with that hand since I always attempt to plant my seed in it (kind of makes me feel sick tbh).

I don't think so either, I think the knowledge on how to procreate is inherent but the more we grow the more our desire to procreate becomes. Not so much to bang a babe cause she got boobs ya feel me?

I don't know man that sounds like a personal problem. No such thing happens to me.

 

[BenjerminGaye]

its mainly pleasure, if the only was for bringing forth children, we wouldn't have come up with so many ways to stop pregnancy, nor world we masturbate, since neither of those increase the chance of offspring.

 

[kimb]

Human attraction is based around biological indications of someone's ability to procreate and bare the best quality offspring. The reason why men are attracted to women with big boobs, pear shaped asses, and hour glass figures is because they're all signs of fertility and the ability to bare children, and the reason why women are attracted to men with chiseled abs, big biceps and a good looking (symmetrical) face is because they're signs of having good genes and being able to provide for potential offspring.

If we stopped finding other people attractive, we'd still had the biological drive to procreate, it just wouldn't be governed by how attractive we looked. Just like how certain birds decide their breeding mates by the quality of the nests they're able to build, or wildebeest fight over a mate, humans would develop a new way to decide which men and women get to pass down their genes. It might be as simple as having the best personality. Come to thing about it, some men use resources and the promise of financial stability to attract women, so maybe procreation will come down to the amount of resources you have.


TL;DR Yes. Men and women would still procreate even if we they weren't attracted to each other, but there would be new means of deciding factors that would go into who gets to pass down their genes.

 

[Robbiebah]

I don't know man that sounds like a personal problem. No such thing happens to me.

It depends on how you look at it literally lol. But that's not what I'm talking about just to prove that wherever you try plant your seed you become intimatly attracted to. We weren't attracted to women our whole lives but when we attempted to plant our seed in them when we first masturbated to them which is essentially what we were trying to do that is how we became sexually attracted to them in addition to our hands. Lol

 

[LustyLover]

Oh never mind, you're trolling.

He's not. He just genuinely has a low IQ.

 

[Robbiebah]

Human attraction is based around biological indications of someone's ability to procreate and bare the best quality offspring. The reason why men are attracted to women with big boobs, pear shaped asses, and hour glass figures is because they're all signs of fertility and the ability to bare children, and the reason why women are attracted to men with chiseled abs, big biceps and a good looking (symmetrical) face is because they're signs of having good genes and being able to provide for potential offspring.

If we stopped finding other people attractive, we'd still had the biological drive to procreate, it just wouldn't be governed by how attractive we looked. Just like how certain birds decide their breeding mates by the quality of the nests they're able to build, or wildebeest fight over a mate, humans would develop a new way to decide which men and women get to pass down their genes. It might be as simple as having the best personality. Come to thing about it, some men use resources and the promise of financial stability to attract women, so maybe procreation will come down to the amount of resources you have.


TL;DR Yes. Men and women would still procreate even if we they weren't attracted to each other, but there would be new means of deciding factors that would go into who gets to pass down their genes.

I understand that some attractive qualities are qualities of purpose and they are attractive because they are qualities that will benefit your offspring. I'm talking more about attractiveness in appearance like why some men like black women instead of white women or why some prefer boobs than ass and vice versa.

 

[Nobel]

Intercourse is the oldest and most primal form of instict, the reason is simple and you shouldnt overthink it. But keep in mind that was a necessity back when the homo sapiens were still getting introduced, when groth and reproduction was a must for survival. Now? Not so much.

 

[SixPathsMike101]

Both, but i'd say if we didn't have that attraction to each other we would not bother procreating. If *** wasn't fun why deal with the opposite *** lol well some would say that.

 

[Legendary Saiyan]

Prob both

 

[kimb]

I understand that some attractive qualities are qualities of purpose and they are attractive because they are qualities that will benefit your offspring. I'm talking more about attractiveness in appearance like why some men like black women instead of white women or why some prefer boobs than ass and vice versa.

That sounds like preference more than attraction tbh

 

[Chikombo]

Attraction, but the bar is low anything can be attractive.

 

[Shig]

I understand that some attractive qualities are qualities of purpose and they are attractive because they are qualities that will benefit your offspring. I'm talking more about attractiveness in appearance like why some men like black women instead of white women or why some prefer boobs than ass and vice versa.

Well, I'm assuming there are a lot of factors and you really can't put your finger on what triggers someone to be attracted to a certain race, gender, body shape or even disability. On one hand, you can say that there are some psychological factors that push someone towards being attracted by a certain niche characteristic of a person. I know this example might sound bad, but take pedophiles for instance, their attraction towards children usually stems from an abusive childhood.

To be more on topic, I believe humans require attraction in order to procreate. I mean, I'm sure there are and have been plenty of cases in which attraction wasn't necessarily involved, but as far as I know attraction is a prerequisite even for some animals. Not in the same way that humans perceive attraction, perhaps, but things like scent, standing and in some cases even looks (see the "Widowbird Experiment") matter when it comes to procreation.

 

[wanderingcactus]

since the beginning of our specie, we are driven to procreate to further our genes.

but in order to ensure the survival of our offsprings, we look for good traits. physical traits.

hence ancient civilizations and tribes adopted a patriarch hierarchy which only the alpha can mate and it only takes one male to impregnate women. if the woman is weak, she will mostly die from childbirth so thats natural selection on their part. as for males, when hunting, the weak will die off.

now in our society today, that is no longer the case. people even with disabilities can now survive harsh weather due to our medical technology advancing everyday.

Still we look out for desirable physical traits as it has been hard programmed into our system. In normal circumstances, we have a set default trait that we would look for. So if you are in hot climates, you mostly would want a dark mate and cold, white mate. tall in flat areas, short in dense forest/hilly areas.

But that is overridden by our societal beauty standards. Marketing and society would bombard us what beauty is and we would normally tend to go along.

For example, if you live in a community that is made up of physically disabled, you might find that attractive. versus if you were an outsider, you might not consider them as a desirable mate as much.

So yes physical attraction is an incentive but overall, it is not enough, relationship-speaking. We no longer have the need to procreate as we are already overpopulated. This overpopulation gives us certain barriers to procreate such as having contraceptives, abortion, same ***, sexual diseases, etc.

So now what was once procreation based on physical traits, sexual attraction, we now have a pseudo-standard for "procreation"

We still would want our genes to be passed on but due to medicine and overpopulation, we don't care as much for physical traits.

That's why some people would sexually assault their hands and fingers or other objects or fruits.

our biology still exists and working as intended = to procreate but we no longer need to do so for the time being.

So no. it is really not a matter of procreation or attraction, is simply is a matter of biology. How certain hormones in our body persuade our mind to do stuff whatever or whoever it may be.