Advertisement
immunity coalitions? birdy-style foodsharing gone sweet? what are your thoughts on the evolution of kissing? some go so far as to say it's not a natural act and was invented by the romans!
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: the evolution of kissing
Thu, September 18, 2008 - 10:21 AMi think its clear that we have some natural predilection for this - its been a prominent feature of paintings, operas, movies, novels etc. for hundreds of years. a few thoughts come to mind:
- it does seem clear that a lot can be gleaned about someone's state of health by kissing them, as well as pheromonal information
- it may be just another incarnation of the rationale behind cuddling; a pair-bonding facilitator
- it may be an unselected but natural consequence of other selected traits, for example the cuddling instinct plus lip sensitivity
to wax empirical, in my experience kissing does seem to be the least impersonal of all acts loosely collected under the umbrella of sexuality - i feel that people are more aware of the other during this than any other act. i lean toward the hypothesis that this is a pair-bonding mechanism. -
-
Re: the evolution of kissing
Thu, September 18, 2008 - 11:03 AMthis sounds reasonable, except for your aside about pheromones. pheromones are not well-proven to be active among humans except among menstruating females, and if they were, they would be received via something like a vomeronasal organ -- not involved in kissing per se.
www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-...START
i wonder about the immunity coalition theory, though i admit it's half-baked. wanna help me think this through? if we share germs, and thus the resultant antibodies strengthen the community at large from infection, is that selectable? or would kissing actually increase infection more? the logic evades me. -
-
Re: the evolution of kissing
Thu, September 18, 2008 - 2:37 PM:: if [pheromones were relevant to partner selection] they would be received via something like a vomeronasal organ
my mouth is about 3/4" from my nose :)
:: if we share germs, and thus the resultant antibodies strengthen the community at large from infection, is that selectable?
wouldn't this suggest more or less indiscriminate kissing? why does it seem to be associated with sexual impulses? why don't heterosexual men experience frequent urges to make out with one another? and don't you get the sense that mankind has spent most of its existence nicely covered in pathogens, without having to go out of his way to find more? -
-
Re: the evolution of kissing
Thu, September 18, 2008 - 8:43 PM"my mouth is about 3/4" from my nose :)"
i bet you didn't read the article then! i don't think they've found any evidence of a vomeronasal organ in humans yet, if memory serves.
"wouldn't this suggest more or less indiscriminate kissing?"
most posit that sexual reproduction itself is worth the cost because the shifts afford better defenses against microbes. for one, sperm are stripped of organelles at fertilization and just pass nuclear DNA on, so that's a "security gate" that channels microbes one-way. so i was thinking that might be connected. sexual partners are in a sense immunity partners, routinely sharing pathogens and building common defenses. that has been an arms race that has escalated over time. -
-
Re: the evolution of kissing
Fri, September 19, 2008 - 2:14 AM:: most posit that sexual reproduction itself is worth the cost because the shifts afford better defenses against microbes.
do you mean to say that a primary rationale behind sexual reproduction is immunological? can you explain this? (your 'security gate' example didn't mean much to me - what do organelles have to do with foreign microbes, unless you perhaps mean virii?)
:: sexual partners are in a sense immunity partners, routinely sharing pathogens and building common defenses.
if there were some individual advantage to being exposed to pathogens, again i don't see how this advantage would indicate 'pathogen monogamy' with one pathogen-sharing partner. if the idea is to train up your immune system on as diverse a population of pathogens as possible, we would expect by this point to be greeting one another by licking tongues than by shaking hands, no? and is there some advantage to reproductive pair-bond partners in having *common* immune defenses, as opposed to individually strong and versatile defenses? -
-
Re: the evolution of kissing
Fri, September 19, 2008 - 4:37 PM"do you mean to say that a primary rationale behind sexual reproduction is immunological? can you explain this?"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evol..._parasites
i drew the conclusions personally from ridley's "the red queen," an excellent tome.
"if there were some individual advantage to being exposed to pathogens, again i don't see how this advantage would indicate 'pathogen monogamy' with one pathogen-sharing partner. if the idea is to train up your immune system on as diverse a population of pathogens as possible"
i'm not an advocate here, just thinking aloud with you, so let's work together on this.
if sex itself is the ultimate exposure of pathogens and sex requires a higher degree of exposure than most activities, then perhaps an immunological partnership in other matters (like mouth to mouth) might serve to supplement communication about the pathogenic condition of a lover, as well as keep you in sync. perhaps it even has something to do with contagion levels to one's offspring and shoring up defenses. i don't know enough about the immune system really to hazard much else.
"is there some advantage to reproductive pair-bond partners in having *common* immune defenses, as opposed to individually strong and versatile defenses? "
maybe because the sex is exposing you already, and routine kissing might freshen the immunological picture, like a periodic assay. i'm sorry, my thinking is fuzzy here, i'm just not sure i am on to anything at all! i think the odds are good i am being too adaptationist.
-
-
-
-
-
