Love and sexual impulses

First question: how is it that sexual impulses are intrinsically linked to loving impulses?

The classic explanation is that love is the catalyst of procreation. However, Eros often points his arrow at individuals unable to reproduce, either for a question of menopause or for a question of homosexuality. Fertilization is also possible without any love, through simple seduction or even rape.

Unlike man, an animal male is, for the vast majority of species, never attracted by a female outside the fertilization periods. Human love would therefore be an exception to the rule. If it is not intrinsically linked to the needs of fertilization, then why does it so generally involve copulation?

Sexual intercourse has objectively all sorts of disadvantages, such as the risk of contagion, the time it takes, and exposure to danger through loss of vigilance (in a primitive environment). One cannot easily justify the close connection between love and sex from the point of view of evolution. That sex implies love, perhaps, since the attraction between the sexes could promote the survival of the species. But that love involves sexual manifestations very systematically, there things are much less clear…

Why couldn’t this wonderful feeling live as a source of happiness without any reference to the genitals? This idea is also advocated by members of certain movements who are determined to radically eliminate this guilty aspect of their lives. Priests of many religions have tried to do the same, with varying degrees of success. All studies in this direction appear to have shown that absolute continence is l-utopia.

One can rightly be surprised by the prevalence of sexual impulses. According to the shrinks, the lack of realization leads straight to neurosis. Why? That the need to eat, in the event of a prolonged shortage, produces a state of panic, is understood: there is immediate danger for the survival of the individual. But that the need to reproduce, especially when it is not circumstances, also leads to such states of lack, is unexplained.

Or nature is badly ruined, in any case as far as humans are concerned (animals are much better off, having sexual impulses than when they are used for something). Or is it our conception of love and sexuality that is badly done… Would these cumbersome impulses have a function that our science can not yet explain?

That would suggest an explanation for the demographic explosion. A function peculiar to human sexuality, but which would escape us, and whose failure would cause us to cling more than nature to the reproductive function?

It is this theme rich in surprises and big by its consequences that we will consider in the following comments…