Those animals which don’t usually have big territories/ranging areas in nature don’t seem to have that much of a problem, so to this non-biologist it seems like it’s at least in part a problem of “how are we supposed to do it when instead of a bedroom we only have a closet”.
I’m suddenly [del]willing[/del] able to take part in any experiments you’re planning.
:smack:Of course. I was thinking of training a retriever not to eat the damn thing, for example.
Have you ever seen a roomful of Corgies or Border Collies? It will be a moving circle, as each dog tries to herd the others.
Interesting math problem there.
I once met a guy who claimed that he and his girlfriend had known nothing of sex when they first had intercourse. He seemed pretty credible. This suggests to me that sexual intercourse can occur instinctively, though perhaps not every couple would do so.
A lot of instinctive behavior works that way. Every part of the behavior doesn’t have to be hardwired into the brain. Just set up the circumstances, the hormones flow at the right time, and things come naturally.
Sounds like the puerile joke I heard about when I was in grade 5, about the doctor who tells the newlywed - “just stick you hard part into where she goes to the bathroom.” The guy phones that night and says “Help, doc, my foot’s stuck in the toilet bowl.”
I would think after a few frottage essions with makeout, any naked action would result in the right parts fitting in sooner or later. Certainly, spooning will work quite well by accident too; I can say I’ve found that the same as njtt.
I suspect the answer is, it is not because it does not have to be purely instinctve behaviour. The completely automatic instinct can disappear if it’s not necessary, and human communication and learning processes mean it’s not really necessary that instinct do all the work.
We learn so easily, and can observe or communicate very easily to figure things out; and there’s always someone to show the way - in a one room mud hut, wigwam or cave, as has been the case for the last 100,000 years, there was plenty of information on display, so to speak, to guide the way; and only one of the couple has to figure it out, then after that they will both know.
I just wanted to add a comment that even outercourse/frottage and urethral sex are going to have a better-than-zero chance of pregnancy. While it may not be ideal, it’s a good bet that a couple of stone-age fumblers are still going to procreate a couple of times over the years.
It’s also worth noting that all mammals are pretty similar in reproductive physiology and even birds and reptiles are not so totally different. Anyone living prior to the industrial age is eventually going to watch animals getting it on. If that doesn’t inspire a little experimentation, that group of humans is probably doomed anyway.
And the percentage of people who lived on a farm was much higher in times past than today. If you look at my ancestry in the 1800’s it’s farmers, farmers, and more farmers. A lot of them probably had been seeing horses and cows getting it on since they (the ancestors) were 5.
Of course it would just happen.
The female would figure out if her finger feels good, his erection might feel even better.
Without external influences there wouldn’t be any shame and without any shame it wouldn’t be long after sexual maturity that she’d be pregnant.
May take them a while to figure the pregnancy correlation, though.
It’s difficult to tease apart culture versus instinct, in humans, since culture has been such a strong influence for such a long time. The Tabula Rasa crowd of social scientists of the mid 1900’s thought that we’re really no longer creatures of instinct so much as creatures of culture, but I’m sure they took a good idea way, way too far.
It doesn’t make sense to talk about humans in their “natural condition” sans culture. Without our culture, we wouldn’t be likely to last long enough to leave any fossils. Even chimps and other apes are very dependent on culture.
There are certainly a number of bird species that can’t find mates if not raised by birds of the same species (or even variety, sometimes): they don’t learn the correct songs. However, I don’t know whether studies have been done with both males and females raised artificially and whether these might mate.
Yeah, but that’s modern history. Any instincts we have are likely to be far older than a mere 10K years. The question is whether primitive hunter-gatherers would often see animals having sex. The answer is yes, but probably not enough to save the human species.
My guess is that it’s not an all-or-nothing proposition. I bet that if there were enough feral children to experiment with, and if it wasn’t horribly wrong to do the experiment, some would discover sex and others wouldn’t (and might not even discover cuddling). Of course, feral children aren’t “humans in their natural state”. But if even feral children discovered sex, then it shows how strong the instincts are.
The answer is Yes.
I know because I saw a documentary about it. The young people featured in the documentary DEFINITELY figured it out.
I believe the name of the documentary was “Blue Lagoon.”
No no, he was pushing her to Mt Sinai.
Ahem. I don’t know about instinctive, even for heterosexual individuals, but it seems to me that if he finds that having friction on his penis feels good, and she finds that having friction on her vaginal walls feels good, and they like each other, they’ll work it out from first principles, so to speak.
Reported for NSFW content. 
That’s where the expression “that dog don’t c*nt” comes from.
Well there’s a 50 50 shot at picking the right hole. 
If the first don’t work then try the other one.
It took thousands of years for mankind to come up with Reeses Peanut butter cups.
Just sayin.
Don’t forget the darkness. Even today there’s shy ladies out there that will only do it in the dark.
Imagine a cave with no light source. The entire act would be basically fumbling around. It may have taken a brave couple enjoying a Nooner to figure out how this stuff works. 
That begs the question of the missionary position. And most farmers don’t run across Bonobos.
In Quest for Fire, I think, screenplay by Anthony Burgess (again, I think) the “discovery” of face-to-face intercourse was highlighted as a significant event in human history.
Next to fire, of course.
ETA: Next to fire in significance. Doing it missionary style next to fire is the third most significant event in human history.
Doing it missionary style next to fire is the third most significant event in my history.
Doing it doggy style in front of the TV means we both get to watch the hockey game.