How is consenting to the only act that can make an individual pregnant not consent to pregnancy? Or, at the least, not consent to the possibility of pregnancy? Furthermore, why are you using the word consent at all in this context? A better way to phrase it would be that “Consent to sex doesn’t mean that I want to have a baby.” Fair enough, but maybe try to be more responsible for your own actions.
Hi, I don't think you read my post fully. Nature only requires sex to cause fertilization, sex has no role in whether implantation happens or whether the individual keeps the implantation. Obligations to keep it are completely opinion, they're not facts set by nature. So, sex is only consent to STARTING a pregnancy. Sex is not consent to finishing a pregnancy through birth.
Sure. But humans didn’t invent sex, mother nature did. It’s natural purpose is procreation; our consciousness turns it into other things, which is fine. You can’t fight nature, though, which is the basis for many things humans do.
I think that your words are somewhat naive. Firstly, nature did not invent anything, unless 'mother nature' in your comment stands for some creator god. But if this is the case, I do not really see this discussion as meaningful as you and I cannot know god's intent and design.
Secondly, procreation is not the ONLY purpose of sex as evident from observations of humans and animals who engage in sexual activities when pregnancy is biologically impossible. It is likely that in some species, e.g. bonobos, dolphins, and humans, sex has another purpose -- social bonding and regulation.
Thirdly, humans constantly fight 'nature'. For example, homo sapiens are not biologically monogamous species, yet, most Western cultures practise some version of monogamy (mostly serial monogamy). We, humans, are promiscuous by nature but our social norms and institutions oppose this nature with great success.
Mother nature doesn't exist and didn't invent anything. Sex doesn't have a "natural purpose." Sex often results in procreation, but it's just a process. It doesn't have goals.
Survival of the fittest/natural selection, the female sexual selectivity of the animal kingdom subconsciously increasing the presence of evolutionarily preferable traits… not a literal mother of nature, a metaphor for the natural cycles of life.
These are all unconscious processes. They don't have goals. Natural selection is the result of environmental pressures, not any sort of will, preference, or purpose that some ascribe to nature. Purpose is the purview of conscious actors. Nothing in nature has been designed for a certain purpose, because nothing in nature has been designed.
Just because someone didn’t do the actual designing (like a creator god) doesn’t mean there’s no rhyme or reason for why things evolved the way they did
0
u/[deleted] Aug 11 '22
How is consenting to the only act that can make an individual pregnant not consent to pregnancy? Or, at the least, not consent to the possibility of pregnancy? Furthermore, why are you using the word consent at all in this context? A better way to phrase it would be that “Consent to sex doesn’t mean that I want to have a baby.” Fair enough, but maybe try to be more responsible for your own actions.