Sex (and Sexuality) in the Future

Yes, but he meant the cards to be a distraction from the long period spent locked in a room. Of course, I wouldn't put it past Jayne to have dirty cards, but I don't think he'd be passing them out ((You saw what that girl did to Book's book right? No respect for other peoples property!))

As far as Aliens in the Future - I think there's other life out there, but given the vasty expanse that is "out there" there's no guarantee that we'll be making contact any time soon.

And I see no reason why Aliens couldn't be similar to us. If they have a similar environment to evolve in ((Or a similarly minded creation being, if you're so inclined [[what poor poor people you are]])) then they could very well end up looking very much like us. That's because our morphology has to make sense, or else we wouldn't be dominant. I also see no reason for them to be anything like us, morphologically speaking.

Interspecies copulation, I think, would probably be impossible given our definitions of species ((I think that it is a group of organisms which are of the same Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family and Genus, which can reproduce successfully and have the "f1" generation reproduce successfully as well)). So basically, if you and your alien lady can have children, and these children can have children, then you basically would effectively be the same species, regardless of the obvious not being the same species. That would certainly throw most Biologists for a bender methinks.

The other issue with the above is the fact that aliens are statistically as likely or more likely not to have a similar number of chromosomes, a similar basic genetic unit, or even a similar way of expressing these genetic units phenotypically ((Is that a word? It is now.)). There is no law in physics that says all genes in all organisms must consist of nucleic acids which code for proteins. For all we know, other species on other worlds may use radon-francium-boride molecules as their basic genetic unit, coding for lithium-hydrogen-titaniumite molecules instead of proteins. We just don't know.

Back to the purpose of the thread - I don't think that there would be any reason for all of humanity to become bisexual in the future, if the future is like Firefly. Let me explain. I believe that homosexuality is a branch of evolution effected by environmental signals, meant unlike other mutations, to curb population growth to a manageable level. If we don't have overpopulation issues ((Which, given our ability to terraform in the 'verse, seems unlikely to be an issue)) then the incidence of Homosexuality would go down. Granted, I don't think that societies view of homosexuality will remain as it does ((We do seem to be growing more tolerant)) but genetically we may not be so predisposed to it. That said, it does seem that in society, bisexuality ((At least in women)) is becoming an attractive trait to heterosexual ((And therefore propogation-inclined)) males, which could by simple genetics increase its rate of incidence.

Anyways, as to sex being degrading when done right, I disagree. Sex is a beautiful, healthy thing, and without it, we wouldn't be here ((Even if you are a child by in-vitro fertilization, your ancestors had sex at some point or another.)).

My .02 Plat.

"I'm not going to say Serenity is the greatest SciFi movie ever; oh wait yes I am." - Orson Scott Card

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I want clean sex, like in Demolition Man!

---

I think I'd rather see a cure to all sexually-transmitted disease before we go to that extreme. All the fun, none of the fatal consequences.

*************************************************

"This is my timey-wimey detector. It goes ding when there's stuff. Also, it can boil an egg at 30 paces, whether you want it to or not, actually, so I've learned to stay away from hens. It's not pretty when they blow."

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

1. The Forever War is not a good book - it's an excellent book. (Though it's also not a novel but a collection of related short stories disguised as a novel.)

2. Kaylee says she knew Inara had some female clients she just didn't expect one. Her and the others reactions tell us that homosexuality may be accepted (at least by the crew) but it is not expected. In many ways I think it's equally indicative that women are seldom high ranking officials in the Alliance. That's pretty sad too.

3. I find interspecies sex in sf dumb. Not offensive, just a mssive strain on my credulity, for many of the reasons above.

www.cpfc.org - my life
www.nbhs.school.nz - my work

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BrowncoatSandinista:
As far as Aliens in the Future - I think there's other life out there, but given the vasty expanse that is "out there" there's no guarantee that we'll be making contact any time soon.

---

Don't forget separation in time. The Earth is 4.5 Billion years old, a variation of 0.000001% in the rate of rise of technological civilisation would give 9.134 thousand years of separation between technological civilisations. That's a tiny variation, producing a startlingly large deviation.

In all likelihood our contact with sentient life will be limited to creatures at an ape like level of evolution, or long lost relics of their cities.

I've heard some figures for Gamma Ray burster's, that make the existence of life in our local stellar neighbourhood unlikely until recently. It's an interesting solution to the Fermi Paradox, what if the reason we can't hear any transmissions from other Alien life forms is because we were the first to evolve intelligence in our local stellar neighbourhood?

Quote:

---

And I see no reason why Aliens couldn't be similar to us. If they have a similar environment to evolve in ((Or a similarly minded creation being, if you're so inclined [[what poor poor people you are]])) then they could very well end up looking very much like us. That's because our morphology has to make sense, or else we wouldn't be dominant.

---

There isn't a reason for them not to be like us, beyond probability. It's perfectly possible that a species identical to us evolved elsewhere, just so improbable as to be virtually discountable. The further back in time you go, the greater a minor deviation will become. Think about an asteroid headed for Earth, a 1% deviation in course far enough away will make it miss the Earth by millions of miles, but a 1% deviation just before it hits the atmosphere will mean it hits Paris instead of London (still worth doing IMHO, bloody French).

Likewise, the further back in time in a planets history you go, the more like Earth it'll have to be to produce even a superficially similar result. Even a tiny change in atmospheric gas percentages during the first stages of life could produce a startlingly large deviation later on. What if a meteor played an important role in Earth life early evolution? What if this meteor on our sister planet hit on the land instead of the ocean in our sister planet? There's countless variables, and there's no knowing how big a change they could influence.

Quote:

---

The other issue with the above is the fact that aliens are statistically as likely or more likely not to have a similar number of chromosomes, a similar basic genetic unit, or even a similar way of expressing these genetic units phenotypically ((Is that a word? It is now.)). There is no law in physics that says all genes in all organisms must consist of nucleic acids which code for proteins.

---

In other terms, an Alien species doesn't have to use DNA, or for that matter use a compound even roughly analogous with DNA? I agree. They might not even be made of meat: http://www.terrybisson.com/meat.html

Quote:

---

For all we know, other species on other worlds may use radon-francium-boride molecules as their basic genetic unit, coding for lithium-hydrogen-titaniumite molecules instead of proteins. We just don't know.

---

We can make educated guess though. Earth life is based around Carbon based proteins in water solution, the closest being proteins in Ammonia solution. Ammonia is a lot like water (for life's purposes) when in liquid form, with some few differences. Ammonia based life would need less stable proteins, since Earth like proteins are too stable at liquid Ammonia temperatures. Also, water is a liquid between 0 and 100 degrees centigrade in 1 atmosphere of pressure, while Ammonia is liquid between -77.7 and -33.4 degrees centigrade. In other words the Arctic circle would be uncomfortably warm to an ammonia life form. When thirsty, they'll also reach for a nice frigid glass of liquid Ammonia.

There's all sort

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME