Of course, they are just animals and that's how they do things
Humans are referred to as animals, no different from our amphibious brothers and reptilian sisters, right?
did you not read Crash's post?
You are talking about the difference between a group of social animals that use sexual intercourse for non-reproductive reasons as compared to animals that do it solely for reproduction.
Humans aren't "just animals". There is no "just animals". You can't generalize so broadly. Keep in mind, animals also include sponges, corals, crustaceans, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds, fish, and a quite a few more. somewhere around 38 phyla for the animal kingdom alone. The only generalization that works is that we have some things in common that no other kingdom has. Try this definition on for size:
quote:
A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure
Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions.
Those are the only generalizations that work. Notice the lack of what sex is used for in the definition.
were it not for the multi-cellular part, many bacteria and protists would be animals, I'd wager. No tell me, what does the sex life of a water flea (Daphnia) have to do with the sex life of primate?
The argument "just animals" doesn't hold any water.
As to your cow and bull--why the hell is a bull attemting to copulate if the cow isn't fertile? waste of time, energy, and a garunteed failure.
Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC
Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.