Lesley writes:
>At the risk of being pounced upon and shouted at I would like to add to the
>recent discussion that I believe that breastfeeding IS sexual and that
>there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  We are all so hung up about
>sex being somehow sordid and separate from the beautiful act of conceiving
>and nurturing a child.  Let us not forget that the biological purpose of
>sex is procreation and that lactation is part of that process.


I'm not pouncing, and I promise not to shout with caps.  I continue to
maintain that mammary glands have nothing to do with sex, except where we
*culturally* define them as having something to do with sex.  Mammary glands
evolved to provide an anti-bacterial fluid to kill germs in the nest full of
eggs.  The nutritional function of the milk came much later.  In no other
species of mammal do the mammary glands play any role in sexual activity,
and in the vast majority of modern human societies the mammary glands play
no role in sexual activity.  Sex is sex and eating is eating.  To my mind
there is a huge gulf between activity that leads to pregnancy and activity
that occurs after the offspring is born.

Regardless of your personal opinion about this matter, consider the
consequences of claiming that breastfeeding is sexual.  Culturally we define
sexual activity with one's children as being not appropriate, illegal,
immoral, etc.  If you define breastfeeding as sexual, then numerous women
will have their motivations questioned and their children taken away from
them for sexual abuse for breastfeeding them.  If we can understand that
breastfeeding has nothing to do with sex in any genetic/biological way, then
there is hope that health care professionals, social workers, judges, and
juries, will see that a woman nursing her baby is NOT engaging in sex with
her baby.  If we insist, in the face of a lack of evidence, that
breastfeeding is sexual and part of a woman's sexuality, the consequences
for mothers and babies could be dreadful.



> There are
>>two things that need to be pleasurable in order for the species to survive
>>- sexual intercourse and breastfeeding.

This is NOT how evolution by natural selection works.  Any genetically-based
behavior/activity that increases reproductive success (the number of
offspring surviving to adulthood) will be selected for, and become more
common in future generations *whether or not* it is pleasurable.  If sex was
unpleasant, as it IS for most of the women in the world most of the time,
those who had sex anyway would be having the most children.  If
breastfeeding was unpleasant, as it can be sometimes, those who breastfed
anyway would be having the most surviving children.  Pleasure has *nothing*
to do with it.  This is a common misunderstanding of the way natural
selection works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Katherine A. Dettwyler, Ph.D.                         email: [log in to unmask]
Anthropology Department                               phone: (409) 845-5256
Texas A&M University                                    fax: (409) 845-4070
College Station, TX  77843-4352