Poly Planet GAIA | ecosexual love | arts of loving | global holistic health | eros

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

4 of 5 - EcoSex @ U Conn - Margulis and Sagan's Mystery Dance - Student Reports: Adam's Take

Dear Earthlings:

The EcoSex course at U Conn is in process. It's a great experience. We are reading amazing books. Thinking out of the box and across disciplines. Students are sending their responses in, with discussion questions. In class, we connect the dots: a holograph of what we've read together, the "required readings." Multiple perspectives and good synergy. Here, we offer a glimpse. Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's Mystery Dance was one of two theory-of-science books. We got four responses: from John, Alissa, Rhiann, Adam, and Michael.

Here's Adam's take:

Response to Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's Mystery Dance: On the Evolution of Human Sexuality

I thoroughly enjoyed “Mystery Dance” by Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan. These women proved to me, once again, that they are competent, brilliant story-tellers, as well as scientists. I was captivated from the start; the interdisciplinary nature of the book, touching on biology, feminist perspectives, paleontology, microbiology, psychology, etc. appealed to my intellect and made it impossible to label the book as too one-sided or bland.

As an evolutionary biology major, I am fascinated by any news or information on evolution and all the process entails. “Mystery Dance” took an approach to the concept of evolution that I had not deeply considered before; the ‘stripper’ motive endowed the concept of evolution with an air of sexuality and, just as importantly, layers. As a child, I viewed evolution like links in a chain – mutations that resulted in the beginning or end of a species. As I have grown, I have learned that evolution if far less cut and dry than that, and this book articulates that superbly.

Another thing I loved about this book was how Margulis and Sagan focus on the human sex organs, and their relation, in comparison, to our fellow primates and, more broadly, to the other species in the various kingdoms and phylum. I had a decent understanding of these concepts before my reading of this book; I had done my own novice research because of interest on the subject. However, “Mystery Dance” took what I already knew and vastly expanded upon it. Why female Homo sapiens have permanently distended breasts after puberty, why male Homo sapiens generally have much larger genitalia than those of our fellow primates, how we associate sex with the primal, and therefore uncontrollable, dirty parts of our bodies – all are questions that I did not even know I had, now answered.

My question: Looking at current trends, can one predict how human sexual physiology will change in the future, assuming we continue existing as a species?

Adam Kocurek
Published with permission

WGSS 3998 - Ecosexuality and the Ecology of Love

Prof. Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio

U Conn, Storrs, Spring 2013

Course Announcement and Description

Dear Earthlings:

Let "nature" be your teacher in the arts of love. Education is the heart of democracy, education to love. Come back for more wonders: Students Responses to appear every Tuesday. Book Reports to be scheduled soon, every other Thursday. Check out our summer offerings: Ecosexuality in Portland, OR, July 17-21. Info and Registration here!

Namaste,

Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio, PhD

Gilf Gaia Extraordinaire

Author of Gaia, Eros, and many other books about love
Professor of Humanities

University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez

Poly Planet GAIA Blog:
http://polyplanet.blogspot.com/

Website: www.serenagaia.com

Be Appraised of Ecosex Community Project PostaHouse
Become a Fan: www.facebook.com/GaiaBlessings

Author's Page/Lists all books:

http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001JS1VKA

YouTube Uploaded Videos: http://www.youtube.com/SerenaAnderlini

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

3 of 5 - EcoSex @ U Conn - Margulis and Sagan's Mystery Dance - Student Responses: Rhiann's Take

Dear Earthlings:

Here's Rhiann's take:

Response to Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's Mystery Dance: On the Evolution of Human Sexuality

I was surprised by much of Mystery Dance. One section that stood out to me was titled, “Opposite or “Neighbor” Sexes?” The authors highlight historian, Thomas Laqueur’s, analyzation of the one-sex model from the Renaissance period. It surprised me that men and women were considered neighbors then as opposed to opposites. To me, these definitions should be the other way around. It seems to me that considering men and women neighbors is more forward thinking then considering them opposites. As I write this, I wonder if any of my peers feel the same? Does anyone believe that the thinkers of the Renaissance knew more about intercourse then we do? I would say that in some cases this is definitely true. I also feel that viewing our bodies as neighbors instead of opposites would make for more liberating sex.

However, the woman was still the inferior partner in both definitions. Why is that? How is it that cultural constructs of femininity and sexuality span centuries? Perhaps, this phenomenon comes from biology. Anatomically, the vagina is the receiver during intercourse. Maybe this is where these ideas of inferiority come from. It is very interesting to me that this concept is the same in both definitions of neighbors and opposites.

Additionally, I wanted to comment on the language. It’s noted that in several languages during the Renaissance the uterus and scrotum were labeled with the same word. These words expressed a shared type of human body. Currently, there are more specific labels for the genitals of both males and females. However, can that only be chalked up to science and medicine? Why do we have to distinguish? Could we distinguish medically and not sexually? I cannot decide if the double label from the Renaissance is under developed or ahead of its time. Overall, I was very surprised by the concepts brought up in this section and the parallels that can be drawn between the Renaissance and modern culture.

Rhiann Peterson
Published with permission

WGSS 3998 - Ecosexuality and the Ecology of Love

Prof. Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio

U Conn, Storrs, Spring 2013

Course Announcement and Description

Dear Earthlings:

Namaste,

Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio, PhD

Gilf Gaia Extraordinaire

Author of Gaia, Eros, and many other books about love
Professor of Humanities

University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez

Poly Planet GAIA Blog:
http://polyplanet.blogspot.com/

Website: www.serenagaia.com

Be Appraised of Ecosex Community Project PostaHouse
Become a Fan: www.facebook.com/GaiaBlessings

Author's Page/Lists all books:

http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001JS1VKA

YouTube Uploaded Videos: http://www.youtube.com/SerenaAnderlini

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

2 of 5 - EcoSex @ U Conn - Margulis and Sagans' Mystery Dance - Student Responses: Alissa's Take

Dear Earthlings:

Here's Alissa's take:

Response to Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's Mystery Dance: On the Evolution of Human Sexuality

When first reading the book I thought it was strange to focus on animals and the reproductive instincts and habits of animals. As the novel continued it became clearer how close humans and mammals like apes tend to be. I learned about natural selection in biology, but I could never distinguish why this applied to humans. Certain things I tend to think do not apply as much in today’s society, but I can see how it is important in some cultures, religions or societies. The author talked about how men sought women who were virgins because their sperm would have a better chance of fertilizing and it eliminated the risk of his wife or partner carrying another man’s offspring. Reading about the various signs that show whether a woman is fertile or not to give a man an advantage or disadvantage tied in with evolutionary aspects. When a woman is ovulating, how that is hidden from males and specific examples such as that made me wonder who has the advantage in natural selection. Women (humans) are more selective when mating because they have fewer eggs and have to carry around the fetus for 9 months before it is born. It makes logical sense that the women would be more careful when choosing a mate because they will be doing the nurturing and the majority of the raising the child. I understand that men can raise children too, but they cannot breast feed and children’s first “imprint” tends to be on their mother since that have that biological bond.

I thought that the author gave an interesting twist to the common evolutionary standpoint of natural selection not only with animals but with the human race. She focused on the interactions between men and women and how in certain societies things are done differently. She successfully spotlights women and where things may have strayed over the years. When thinking of the act of sex men are the ones who are thought of first. Society focuses on pleasing men and women fall to the wayside. The author finally gives women their spotlight spending at least a chapter on the female orgasm and what it insinuates. She goes as far to include how in some societies boys once they reach maturity must learn how to properly satisfy a woman before themselves. While reading that portion I thought in that culture that this “training” was excessive, but the importance remains on the women. This section made me realize that the female orgasm is seen as a more private and sensitive subject in society showing the gender bias that has occurred. This also relates to the concept how a man that sleeps with multiple women is a “stud” or a “player”, more positive terms as opposed to a woman who sleeps with multiple people; she is “whore” or “slut.” To me these terms should be reversed because when a man is sleeping with multiple women it can be seen through the survival of the fittest model. He is sleeping with an excessive amount of women to better his chances of fertilizing an egg and having his genes live on. I know that most men are not sleeping with multiple women in hopes that they impregnate all of them and have children to carry their genetic traits. Viewing sex from a biological and natural selection standpoint gives the reader and alternate perspective to see the way society works and has evolved.

I do not understand the imprinting process and how this leads to people liking men, women, being homosexual or heterosexual?

Why do you think that men could be disadvantaged more than women from the natural selection viewpoint?

Alissa Maus
Published with permission

WGSS 3998 - Ecosexuality and the Ecology of Love

Prof. Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio

U Conn, Storrs, Spring 2013

Course Announcement and Description

Dear Earthlings:

Namaste,

Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio, PhD

Gilf Gaia Extraordinaire

Author of Gaia, Eros, and many other books about love
Professor of Humanities

University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez

Poly Planet GAIA Blog:
http://polyplanet.blogspot.com/

Website: www.serenagaia.com

Be Appraised of Ecosex Community Project PostaHouse
Become a Fan: www.facebook.com/GaiaBlessings

Author's Page/Lists all books:

http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001JS1VKA

YouTube Uploaded Videos: http://www.youtube.com/SerenaAnderlini

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

1 of 5 - EcoSex @ U Conn - Margulis and Sagan's Mystery Dance - Student Reports: John's Take

Dear Earthlings:

Here's John's take:

Response to Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's Mystery Dance: On the Evolution of Human Sexuality

I came across the same problems with this book as I did with her last one. Lynn Margulis seems to know what she’s talking about scientifically (I assume, I simply don’t have the scientific background to vouch for it) but she can’t, or won’t draw conclusions. The bookend theme of Mystery Dance is the image of the ouroboros: the serpent that curves around and eats itself, creating more of itself in the process of destruction. She ends her introduction with a note on time, and ends the whole book reminding us that sexual evolution hasn’t ended. But I think the overarching theme of her book is on page 11: “The slang word for coitus simultaneously means making love and an act of aggression.” Margulis seems to imply that between modern human society and our bacterial ancestors, there was a lot of rape that wasn’t necessarily a bad thing because it contributed to human evolution. I’m not sure I agree with that.

This theme of “rape has its benefits” might not be exactly what she was aiming for, but it’s clear that Margulis believes her science leads to that conclusion, even though she doesn’t want to outright support rape (not that she, or anyone, should). She writes,

According to John Alcock, the feminist hypothesis that rape is solely an instrument of social oppression against women – a violent means of male domination without biological basis – cannot be completely correct. Alcock points to the fact that raped women are not usually in positions of social power, but, rather, they are young, often poor, and relatively defenseless women in the peak of their childbearing years… Perhaps women of childbearing age are most often raped because the mothers of rapists, perceived by the weak infant to be Godlike in their power, were also usually young women… Nonetheless, the question lingers as to whether sexual violence is partially the result of the reptilian brain developing – or misdeveloping – in sexually arousable young people. (132)

The problem I have with this isn’t so much the evolutionary implications, but that she tries to connect it to human terms. Margulis makes the connection that rape as any sort of mental activity is reptilian, base, and as close to biologically or genetically wrong as can be said, but she also says that nature has no morals, and the whole point of this book is to show us how undifferent from animals we actually are.

I have no problem with learning from animals, personifying animals, and treating animals with kindness and dignity. Those are all of the marks of an evolved culture. But evolution is kind of the point. Two mating alligators don’t view what they’re doing as sexual violence, it’s just mating to produce offspring. There is a significant lack of animal perspective in her writing on sexual violence.

I don’t have a problem with what Margulis writes, I just have a problem with the implications of the way she writes it. I think Mystery Dance is a little obsessed with the stripper allusion that she can’t draw a significant enough distance between viewer and viewed. Going to a strip club is supposed to excite and entice someone. The stripper is supposed to draw you in, not repulse you with the thought that all of her negative qualities are yours as well.

Questions for Discussion:

1. Does sexual violence have a significant role to play in human evolution?

2. Can it even be viewed as “violence” or even “sex” outside of biological terminology?

3. Is there anything inherent that separates us from animals? Or are rapists just alligators in human skin?

John Nitowski
Published with permission

WGSS 3998 - Ecosexuality and the Ecology of Love

Prof. Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio

U Conn, Storrs, Spring 2013

Course Announcement and Description

Dear Earthlings:

Namaste,

Serena Anderlini-D'Onofrio, PhD