# The Truth Is We Are All Animals, so... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 10, 2010, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800 "2010-08-10T07:08:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/61 "2010-08-11T19:09:50Z")
It almost makes you think that all life is suffering. And that the root of that suffering is desire. Perhaps the way to end that suffering is to end the desire. Just a thought… ---
**Author:** ![Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e8c25b/32.png) [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pink_Majik_Trix)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/62 "2010-08-11T19:11:38Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It almost makes you think that all life is suffering. And that the root of that suffering is desire. Perhaps the way to end that suffering is to end the desire. > > Just a thought… perhaps the most insightful post thus far ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/63 "2010-08-11T19:29:16Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > > [@John\_Mace](#): > > > > It almost makes you think that all life is suffering. And that the root of that suffering is desire. Perhaps the way to end that suffering is to end the desire. > > > > Just a thought… > > perhaps the most insightful post thus far Congratulations! You’re Buddhist! ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/64 "2010-08-11T19:54:37Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > Am I saying run around naked, no. Am I saying scamper around on all fours? Let’s not be ridiculous. > > What I am saying is be FREE for goodness sakes. > > If you expect sex to be something meaningful and it’s not, that generates negativity. > > If you expect that sex is something meaningless and experience meaning, that generates positivity. > > That’s the point, and sex is just one example in a universe of relative themes. Fair enough, but you appreciate that the point that pretty much everyone else is making is _not_ “Be repressed” or “Women, for god’s sake don’t have casual sex!”. We’re just questioning the assumption of the OP, and some later posts, that humans come from a background of free love and it’s just modern society that holds us back from that. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/65 "2010-08-11T20:18:47Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > Am I saying run around naked, no. Am I saying scamper around on all fours? Let’s not be ridiculous. Then don’t try and use a false argument from SCIENCE! to try and give your opinions an importance or universality that they simply do not have. > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > What I am saying is be FREE for goodness sakes. > > If you expect sex to be something meaningful and it’s not, that generates negativity. > > If you expect that sex is something meaningless and experience meaning, that generates positivity. > > That’s the point, and sex is just one example in a universe of relative themes. So the point is, assume the worst, and be pleasantly surprised when you’re wrong? In otherwords, happiness via pessimism? I can actually get behind that. Of course it doesn’t seem to bear much relationship to anything you’ve said prior, but perhaps you’ve just been being subtle. > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > now if you can’t derive sense out of that, then maybe this thread is not for you, because we’re talking about a lot of more complex things then that. Is this an attempt to claim I’m too dumb because I can’t inject meaning into your wandering screeds? Because there’s another possible explanation. > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > Relating this to “love” or seeking “relationships”, you are dependent on another person. You want someone to LOVE you back, something that you can’t control. And if that person sabotages your “personal preference” then you lose and become unhappy. > > This happens all the time. And there are a lot of people who are unhappy and hold cynical views because of it. > > If that’s a personal preference that you want to live by, leaving your happiness up to chance, lmao then so be it! For example this - it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with artificially lowering your expectations. It seems to be arguing for avoiding other people _completely_, since you can’t control them, and failing that keeping all human interactions as emotionally distant as possible. In other words you’re advocating making sex an empty meaningless act of mutual masturbation. Which is okay if that’s your thing, I guess, but to me it sounds like a crappy substitute for a real relationship - even if the relationship doesn’t necessarily work out. It’s like you’re offering me a penny and telling me to take it over a 1 in 100 chance for a million dollars. Not a good deal in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Maggie\_the\_Ocelot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@Maggie\_the\_Ocelot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maggie_the_Ocelot)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/66 "2010-08-11T20:30:37Z")
> [@FriarTed](#): > > …let’s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel. Okay, I am not surprised that someone got into this thread with the quote before I did. I _am_ :eek: that it was Friar Ted, who I always mentally picture as a sort of Friar Tuck fellow. I know he’s not _actually_ a priest, but I sort of think of him as one, and I was slightly shocked! ---
**Author:** ![Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e8c25b/32.png) [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pink_Majik_Trix)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/67 "2010-08-11T20:32:19Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > > > Am I saying run around naked, no. Am I saying scamper around on all fours? Let’s not be ridiculous. > > Then don’t try and use a false argument from SCIENCE! to try and give your opinions an importance or universality that they simply do not have. > > So the point is, assume the worst, and be pleasantly surprised when you’re wrong? In otherwords, happiness via pessimism? > > I can actually get behind that. Of course it doesn’t seem to bear much relationship to anything you’ve said prior, but perhaps you’ve just been being subtle. > > Is this an attempt to claim I’m too dumb because I can’t inject meaning into your wandering screeds? Because there’s another possible explanation. > > > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > > > Relating this to “love” or seeking “relationships”, you are dependent on another person. You want someone to LOVE you back, something that you can’t control. And if that person sabotages your “personal preference” then you lose and become unhappy. > > > > This happens all the time. And there are a lot of people who are unhappy and hold cynical views because of it. > > > > If that’s a personal preference that you want to live by, leaving your happiness up to chance, lmao then so be it! > > For example this - it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with artificially lowering your expectations. It seems to be arguing for avoiding other people _completely_, since you can’t control them, and failing that keeping all human interactions as emotionally distant as possible. In other words you’re advocating making sex an empty meaningless act of mutual masturbation. > > Which is okay if that’s your thing, I guess, but to me it sounds like a crappy substitute for a real relationship - even if the relationship doesn’t necessarily work out. It’s like you’re offering me a penny and telling me to take it over a 1 in 100 chance for a million dollars. Not a good deal in my opinion. Avoiding people _completely_? Come on now… Not at all. Sex is how we reproduce, correct? Survive and replicate. Thankfully it feels good to have sex. Is that not good enough? Now you want it to “mean” something? Only as cultures evolved sex now has _meaning_. If having an orgasm is empty and meaningless then maybe you have a crappy way of looking at things. It’s not the sex that you want but the feeling of someone loving you back? In my opinion that’s weak. My happiness is not created by other people, I create it. People can only make the _experience_ more or less pleasant. But they do not define it. It seems you oppose this view ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/68 "2010-08-11T20:57:17Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > It’s not the sex that you want but **the feeling of someone loving you back? In my opinion that’s weak.** My happiness is not created by other people, I create it. People can only make the _experience_ more or less pleasant. But they do not define it. So then, why not masturbate? Essentially, the big problem with your argument is that you’re assuming that it’s SOLELY social conditioning that drives the sexual decisions that people make. I have known more than one person, from varying walks of life and belief structures, who believe that there’s nothing sinful about any configuration of sexual behavior you care to name but THEY PERSONALLY do not enjoy it unless it’s in the context of a emotionally intimate relationship. You are coming across as saying that you believe this is not possible and/or weak. Emotions have a scientific basis, after all. The chemical transmitters in your brain have physical reality, they are produced and taken up at wildly different rates by different people under different conditions, and denying emotional context to behaviors with a lot of neurotransmitters involved (or saying said context as justification for behavior is “weak”) is just as ascientific as basing your morality on a iron age myth collection. Not everyone’s brain is wired to be a solo player who can freely take up and discard the companionship of other humans at a whim, and as a matter of fact it would seem to be maladaptive at any number of points in human history, including arguably today. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/69 "2010-08-11T21:05:46Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > Avoiding people _completely_? Come on now… > > Not at all. > > Sex is how we reproduce, correct? > Survive and replicate. Thankfully it feels good to have sex. Is that not good enough? Now you want it to “mean” something? > > Only as cultures evolved sex now has _meaning_. > > If having an orgasm is empty and meaningless then maybe you have a crappy way of looking at things. > > It’s not the sex that you want but the feeling of someone loving you back? In my opinion that’s weak. My happiness is not created by other people, I create it. People can only make the _experience_ more or less pleasant. But they do not define it. > > It seems you oppose this view I don’t oppose _you_ having it, but it’s certainly not for me. And it’s apparently not for all the women you turn down your offers of meaningless quickies, either. It really does sound like masturbation is the thing for you. Seriously. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/70 "2010-08-11T21:18:41Z")
> [@FriarTed](#): > > …let’s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel. End Of Thread. Well played, sir 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e8c25b/32.png) [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pink_Majik_Trix)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/71 "2010-08-11T21:26:14Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > > > Avoiding people _completely_? Come on now… > > > > Not at all. > > > > Sex is how we reproduce, correct? > > Survive and replicate. Thankfully it feels good to have sex. Is that not good enough? Now you want it to “mean” something? > > > > Only as cultures evolved sex now has _meaning_. > > > > If having an orgasm is empty and meaningless then maybe you have a crappy way of looking at things. > > > > It’s not the sex that you want but the feeling of someone loving you back? In my opinion that’s weak. My happiness is not created by other people, I create it. People can only make the _experience_ more or less pleasant. But they do not define it. > > > > It seems you oppose this view > > I don’t oppose _you_ having it, but it’s certainly not for me. And it’s apparently not for all the women you turn down your offers of meaningless quickies, either. > > It really does sound like masturbation is the thing for you. Seriously. Interesting how you assume i’m a man without me ever declaring my gender. I’m curious to know what got you to that conclusion. I enjoy having sex with another person. What i’m saying is I do it for the experience not for love. and it seems like your friends, Zeriel, can only enjoy it if there is a feeling of love in the air. They can’t be satisfied by just having amazing sex, because it’s only amazing if it’s _intimate_. I don’t say it’s weak because you you want to have a fairytale romance. I say it’s weak because sex is objectively positive and would improve people’s well being if practiced as someone practices a good diet. What we’re talking about is that the objective experience which is _good_ is not casual because how people feel about it subjectively. It’s a matter of preference, and that preference deprives you of objective goodness. It’s like taking a pill that is good for you. It’s better if you take it with someone else. But you will only take that pill with someone else if you’re intimate with them? That seems horrible. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/72 "2010-08-11T21:43:40Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > Interesting how you assume i’m a man without me ever declaring my gender. > > I’m curious to know what got you to that conclusion. I arrived at this conclusion because in your hypothetical, it was the (weak, weak) woman who said no. If you were extrapolating from personal experience, that would make you the man. The fact that per the stereotypes your view is much more “male-like” doesn’t hurt either. > [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > I enjoy having sex with another person. > > What i’m saying is I do it for the experience not for love. > and it seems like your friends, Zeriel, can only enjoy it if there is a feeling of love in the air. They can’t be satisfied by just having amazing sex, because it’s only amazing if it’s _intimate_. > > I don’t say it’s weak because you you want to have a fairytale romance. > > I say it’s weak because sex is objectively positive and would improve people’s well being if practiced as someone practices a good diet. > > What we’re talking about is that the objective experience which is _good_ is not casual because how people feel about it subjectively. It’s a matter of preference, and that preference deprives you of objective goodness. > > It’s like taking a pill that is good for you. It’s better if you take it with someone else. But you will only take that pill with someone else if you’re intimate with them? > > That seems horrible. In my opinion sex isn’t objectively good. It has this side effect see. One that you can protect against somewhat, but has been known to happen depite all efforts to the contrary. It’s called babies. And from what I hear, they can be a _severe_ buzzkill - _especially_ if you’re only in the relationship (such as it is) for the old bump-'n-grind. That _alone_ is reason enough for a rational person to be a bit leery of relationship-free sex. Enough so that I personally have never even spent a single thought considering the merits it might otherwise have. I realize that I’m the minority in this. I suspect that _most_ people prefer to have their cake and eat it too - have their sex, and _also_ have that cuddle afterwards. And maybe even be able to stand talking with the person occasionally. So yeah, it may be laziness. We just want one-stop-shopping when it comes to positive human interaction. ---
**Author:** ![Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e8c25b/32.png) [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pink_Majik_Trix)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/73 "2010-08-11T22:34:10Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > In my opinion sex isn’t objectively good. It has this side effect see. One that you can protect against somewhat, but has been known to happen depite all efforts to the contrary. It’s called babies. And from what I hear, they can be a _severe_ buzzkill - _especially_ if you’re only in the relationship (such as it is) for the old bump-'n-grind. > > That _alone_ is reason enough for a rational person to be a bit leery of relationship-free sex. This answer is based on the fact that one does not practice safe sex. With safe sex as an alternative to prevent babies from happening how does that change your rationale? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/74 "2010-08-11T22:41:57Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > > [@begbert2](#): > > > > In my opinion sex isn’t objectively good. It has this side effect see. One that you can protect against somewhat, but has been known to happen depite all efforts to the contrary. It’s called babies. And from what I hear, they can be a _severe_ buzzkill - _especially_ if you’re only in the relationship (such as it is) for the old bump-'n-grind. > > > > That _alone_ is reason enough for a rational person to be a bit leery of relationship-free sex. > > This answer is based on the fact that one does not practice safe sex. > > With safe sex as an alternative to prevent babies from happening how does that change your rationale? No, it’s based on the fact that I don’t believe that safe sex is 100% effective. Which is to say I think that “safe sex” is a misnomer/fiction. But in fantasyland where 100% safe safe sex is an alternative…I prefer to one stop shop when it comes to relationships. This is not to say I don’t masturbate - I do! A lot! It’s saying that when it comes to relationships I don’t bother trying to cultivate relationships that will provide me nothing but sex. Relationships are work, and I want more payoff for my efforts. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/75 "2010-08-11T23:31:00Z")
This is a really strange thread. If I get what the OP is saying, he thinks he should be able to have sex whenever, wherever he wants just because we’re animals. It’s not clear, to me at least, if the other party’s desires come into it at all. How does that old adage go? Ah yes – “Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest.” ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/76 "2010-08-11T23:39:18Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > This is a really strange thread. If I get what the OP is saying, he thinks he should be able to have sex whenever, wherever he wants just because we’re animals. It’s not clear, to me at least, if the other party’s desires come into it at all. The OP presented hypothetical about a couple getting together for a quick shag where the woman demurres at the last minute because, despite _ **wanting** _ meaningless sex, she was held back by the whimpy desire to not to be seen as a slut, and the truly pathetic wish to have some sort of _relationship_ with the male who’s using her as a fuck-toy. Based on this I conclude the OP is a man (an assumption that was met with protest but not denial), and that the OP is of the opinion that the world would be much better if other people wanted to have casual sex all the time, just like him/her. So s/he’s not advocating rape; to the explicit contrary s/he’s complaining that people really ought to change their attitudes and come to him/her willingly. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/77 "2010-08-11T23:54:38Z")
She’s just not that into you. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/78 "2010-08-11T23:59:08Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > She’s just not that into you. S/He’s advancing the position that nobody should want to be into _anyone_ before submitting to sex with them. So if you were right, his/her plan would work great! ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/79 "2010-08-12T00:07:14Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > So if you were right, his/her plan would work great! Everyone should be up for casual hook-ups all the time, because sex is always good! Of course, sex ISN’T always good. Having sex with someone who you find creepy or disgusting can be the opposite of good. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800/80 "2010-08-12T00:53:35Z")
> [@Pink\_Majik\_Trix](#): > > [ > So you believe there was once a man that was moon walking on water? > > He died. then _POOF_ Came back to life? > > Is this what you believe? No. I am a Christian, and I believe that typical Christians believe. Since you apparently are ignorant of what that is, perhaps you should read [the book](http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/kjv/mat.htm). Meanwhile, I’ve posted some reasons why you’re argument that people would be happier with fewer social restrictions on sex is wrong, and why experience shows that people are happier with those social restrictions on sex in place. Are you going to address those reasons, or is ignoring them the best that you can do? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-truth-is-we-are-all-animals-so/549800.md?page=5)