On the Unnatural Nature of Human Love, as Currently Expressed
Re-reading Fluke by Chris Moore seems to have set off a chain of reflective reactions, especially his anecdote concerning the sexual mores of female dolphin and their biosocial imperatives, an efficient species survival mechanism absolutely opposed to that currently adopted by humanity, and thus the title for this very short colloquy.
Can it be that love, rather than a unique sharing with another human being is rather a separation from the rest of humanity and thus, in the end, species threatening rather than a mechanism for species preservation? Can it be that by concentrating our love on one person, what we are doing is isolating them and ourselves from everyone else?
Why is it that the generally recognized norms of sexual conduct, all the associated taboos, are so blatantly and regularly violated? It seems that fidelity is now the exception: has that always been the case? Is monogamy the aberration, less unnatural only than celibacy? And what of the temporal boundaries for sexual maturity so completely ignored by the young they are supposedly meant to protect. Should the outset of menses have a normative as well as physical consequence? Or do manmade norms have no place here?
When so critical an aspect of our humanity seems so completely confused and dysfunctional shouldn’t pragmatism shout to us that we have it all wrong? And is the manifestation of that fundamental error reflected in most of our interpersonal relations and relationships, in our cultural psychosis and in our aberrational interregional relationships? Why has perpetual war become the norm, why the growing gap between rich and poor, the growing impunity of the powerful?
Do we have it all wrong? Should we reconsider our most primordial programming, perhaps look to the successful analogies in nature for answers?
 © Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2010; all rights reserved