JUST PHILOSOPHISING - ON THE CASE FOR HAVING CHILDREN! PART 4.

 

There is a 'natural fit' between a woman and a man, as is seemingly the case with the 'male' and 'female' of probably all species. A natural attraction, which might not be for both of them simply or primarily a sexual chemistry. 

Or operates at the same level of sexual chemistry. A man, it seems to me, at least in the earlier stages of our evolution, might have been more motivated and attracted to the woman through sexual desire and lust. 

Whereas the woman was probably more interested in the implied or expressed protection and security which the man, at least then, was seen as representing. 

Even though there would have been, even then, the irony that the danger and threat which the woman would have wanted to be protected from, would have been mostly from men.

And it is, I would argue, man's 'need' or innate urge for sexual gratification, and the woman' probably culturally ingrained or instituted 'need' for protection. 

That might have, at a subconscious level, combined and led/driven our ancestors into establishing and, through the ages, developing the prototype 'human family system.' 

Of course, this 'family system' is not unique to us humans, as it exists in other species within the primate world. 

Whether it be birds raring their young until they are able to fend for themselves, or lions, tigers, elephants, dogs, et al, taking care of their young they are able to branch out on their own. 

Indeed, what this 'family system' attest to most, is that it has not come about or been instituted by the species that practice it, because of the parents' love of or for each other. 

But rather that its primary purpose is to ensure the survival of the species through the provision of 'a physically and psychologically safe and secure space'. 

It is about the survival of the species through the protection of the species. 

To be continued!