![]() Sexual diversity comfortably fits under the label "natural." Consequently, much of the discussion involving human evolution focuses on heterosexual activity.Īnd this can produce a couple of sloppy inferences.įirst, the focus on biological reproduction in evolution can suggest to some that heterosexual activity is "natural" and that other sexualities are "unnatural." However, homosexual, bisexual, and autosexual activity is observed throughout the animal kingdom. ![]() And for millions of years of human evolution that has involved the fertilization a woman's ovum by a man's sperm. The reason for this is that biological evolution, for the most part, is focused on sexual reproduction. You can't claim to speak about bodies, in any comprehensive or coherent manner, without attending to the forces that produced and shaped those bodies over millions of years.Īnd yet, the creates a suite of issues, particularly for those of us who want to include the bodies and sexualities outside of the heterosexual and cisgendered box, the bodies and sexualities of LGBTQ persons. ![]() Last week I wrote a post (and a follow-up post) where I argued that incarnational theology needs to attend to evolutionary science if it wants to truly embrace the notion of embodiment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |