Privacy -- why?

[McCulloch]

It is to be expected that sexuality be a private and personal matter.

The question for debate is, "Why is human sexuality a private matter?" It is quite evident that almost all human societies regard sexuality as being a private matter. Why is that? Other species do not seem to require privacy. Even other species of mammals do not seem to require privacy. Even our closest genetic relatives the Chimpanzees do not require privacy.

• For the Bible believers, Genesis hints at it but does not answer the question why.

  When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit, and ate; and she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate. The eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked. They sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. They heard the voice of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Yahweh God among the trees of the garden. Yahweh God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” The man said, “I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.”

  Why, all of a sudden, was nakedness a bad thing? The narrative seems to assume that once their eyes were opened, they just knew that they needed privacy. God didn't even have to tell them. Becoming wise seemed to be enough to instill the need for sexual modesty. Why? Is there some inherent wisdom in this?

• For the rest of us, can we point to any evolutionary advantage that the development and enforcement sexual privacy would give to a group of early humans over a group that may not have practiced it?

Is there some reason why we sometimes impose sexual privacy to the detriment of our own health? Breast feeding mothers have been asked to use the church washroom in order to avoid impropriety. Muslim women have at times been denied the serviced of obstetrics and gynecology for the same reason.

[AlAyeti]

The question can be answered in darwinistic terms.

If a man was having sexual intercourse with a healthy looking woman in the sight of another man, and the other man was of powerful size and strength, then the weaker man could very well lose his place to mate. The sexual feelings in human males finds arousal from visual stimulation as much as reproductive interactions (courting, foreplay) with females.

"Natural morality" can be seen in the Alpha male and Alpha female. They literally drive away other potentially harmful competition.

In human ways and means, privacy is a smart thing.

Morality has been shown to be a healthy thing. Immorality has spread sexually transmitted diseases in a pandemic fashion. Many humans have been rendered impotent by these diseases as well as died from them.

Pornography, much like the reactions that inferior pack members in animals display when observing others mating, cause tensions of a sexual nature to rise to a fever pitch.

Male Lions routinely drive off or kill any male competition and mate with female Lions away from the sight of other competitors.

In chimps, just watching mating pairs can cause lessor males to rape immature females or younger males. The comparison to the human male is inescapable.

Privacy in humans is also derived from common courtesy. Not all humans are physically attractive and not all humans are hygienically clean.

The need for "society" to enforce morality "laws" comes from decency and health reasons from many different angles.

[bernee51]

It is to be expected that sexuality be a private and personal matter.

The question for debate is, "Why is human sexuality a private matter?"

A lot of it may be cultural. Perhaps those who have limited exposure to other cultures have the idea that sexuality - discussion or display, is something that is hidden. I have a great photo taken in Amsterdam...a McD's outlet with a cannabis shop next door on one side and a 'adult' shop on the other.

I also remember seeing a TV advert from Denmark where there is an extended family dinner and the father is proudly announcing his daugters first menstruation.

Try spending some time in China or India where, in some places, personal privacy is a virtual impossibility - yet they still manage to have the odd baby or two.

[AlAyeti]

Bernee: .

I have a great photo taken in Amsterdam...a McD's outlet with a cannabis shop next door on one side and a 'adult' shop on the other.

After your children eat their Happy Meal which shop do you take them in first? Porno or Pot?

In China the odd baby is female and the two baby if it is female is killed.

The Kama Sutra? Any public places for those positions to be attempted?

[inobaba]

The question can be answered in darwinistic terms.

If a man was having sexual intercourse with a healthy looking woman in the sight of another man, and the other man was of powerful size and strength, then the weaker man could very well lose his place to mate. The sexual feelings in human males finds arousal from visual stimulation as much as reproductive interactions (courting, foreplay) with females.

"Natural morality" can be seen in the Alpha male and Alpha female. They literally drive away other potentially harmful competition.

In human ways and means, privacy is a smart thing.

Morality has been shown to be a healthy thing. Immorality has spread sexually transmitted diseases in a pandemic fashion. Many humans have been rendered impotent by these diseases as well as died from them.

Pornography, much like the reactions that inferior pack members in animals display when observing others mating, cause tensions of a sexual nature to rise to a fever pitch.

Male Lions routinely drive off or kill any male competition and mate with female Lions away from the sight of other competitors.

In chimps, just watching mating pairs can cause lessor males to rape immature females or younger males. The comparison to the human male is inescapable.

Privacy in humans is also derived from common courtesy. Not all humans are physically attractive and not all humans are hygienically clean.

The need for "society" to enforce morality "laws" comes from decency and health reasons from many different angles.

Man, this guy is good. I like his logic, my style of posting replies.

[ST88]

The question can be answered in darwinistic terms.

If a man was having sexual intercourse with a healthy looking woman in the sight of another man, and the other man was of powerful size and strength, then the weaker man could very well lose his place to mate. The sexual feelings in human males finds arousal from visual stimulation as much as reproductive interactions (courting, foreplay) with females.

"Natural morality" can be seen in the Alpha male and Alpha female. They literally drive away other potentially harmful competition.

In human ways and means, privacy is a smart thing.

Hmmmm. I don't think so. in Darwinistic terms, as you say, survival depends upon the strongest individuals being able to reproduce. In your example, the strongest individual is not allowed to reproduce. In fact, this form of privacy allows weaker individuals to reproduce, which would allow this sense of privacy to flourish, but not the physical strength that one needs in order to survive in a harsh hunter-gatherer environment. In fact, the opposite would be true. In order for the strongest genes to survive, it would be necessary for the strongest individuals to make a public display of their procreation in order to display dominance.

And that's just looking at males. Consider females, who would possibly increase their chances for a better mating match by publicly displaying their "affection" for one male in hopes of making the strongest male react in such a way (e.g., had he been reticent beforehand). To conclude, it would be evolutionarily advantageous to display procreation, which is, I believe what was going on, not unlike what happens with other primates. I believe sexual privacy is a societal construct intended to keep civil order.

Pornography, much like the reactions that inferior pack members in animals display when observing others mating, cause tensions of a sexual nature to rise to a fever pitch.

I believe that pornography is merely a way to simulate the instictive pleasure that one feels when looking at a member of the opposite sex. It, too, is a societal construct.

In chimps, just watching mating pairs can cause lessor males to rape immature females or younger males. The comparison to the human male is inescapable.

If true, there is no way to know -- without further study -- if this is due to the pornographic nature of the act or the imitative nature of the act.

[Vianne]

It is to be expected that sexuality be a private and personal matter.

The question for debate is, "Why is human sexuality a private matter?" It is quite evident that almost all human societies regard sexuality as being a private matter. Why is that? Other species do not seem to require privacy. Even other species of mammals do not seem to require privacy. Even our closest genetic relatives the Chimpanzees do not require privacy.

• For the Bible believers, Genesis hints at it but does not answer the question why.

  When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit, and ate; and she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate. The eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked. They sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. They heard the voice of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Yahweh God among the trees of the garden. Yahweh God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” The man said, “I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.”

  Why, all of a sudden, was nakedness a bad thing? The narrative seems to assume that once their eyes were opened, they just knew that they needed privacy. God didn't even have to tell them. Becoming wise seemed to be enough to instill the need for sexual modesty. Why? Is there some inherent wisdom in this?

• For the rest of us, can we point to any evolutionary advantage that the development and enforcement sexual privacy would give to a group of early humans over a group that may not have practiced it?

Is there some reason why we sometimes impose sexual privacy to the detriment of our own health? Breast feeding mothers have been asked to use the church washroom in order to avoid impropriety. Muslim women have at times been denied the serviced of obstetrics and gynecology for the same reason.

Those are great points, McCulloch! Frankly I'd never thought of the matter before. I suppose it's simply a squeamishness issue, and the fact that sex is, in our culture, seen as "dirty" and highly "adult", something that certainly shouldn't be seen by children. In some other less developed cultures, it's just making a baby, and adults and children pay no mind. I suppose if Americans approached sex with that attitude, it wouldn't be necessary to keep it locked behind closed doors.

For the record, I think it's absurd that we don't complain about breasts hanging out of advertisements or television shows, but to breastfeed a baby (y'know, the whole evolutionary point of breasts) is considered improper.