Do human beings possess a sexual instinct?

A sexual instinct exists in animals to ensure that they reproduce and thus perpetuate the species. It is an observed fact that animals in natural settings are INCAPABLE of resisting the urge to reproduce when sexual pheromones trigger their sexual instinct into action. They are in this sense slaves to their sexual instinct, and this is what faithfully keeps their species going. All animals then, have a sexual instinct. But do humans have a sexual instinct? One might argue that human beings are animals also, and thus must similarly possess a sexual instinct. Sexually speaking however, we are very different from all other animals on this planet.

One of the criteria for a behaviour being considered instinctive is that it must be compulsive in nature: when something in the environment triggers an instinctive drive, the organism responds with a pre-determined stereotyped behaviour. In the case of sexual reproduction, when animals’ sexual instincts are triggered they reproduce without any choice in the matter. They are slaves to their sexual instinct. The question of whether humans possess a sexual instinct is easily answered by noting that human beings as a species are uniquely capable of choosing not to reproduce. Sure, most of us do engage in reproduction, but we do so by choice, as demonstrated by the millions upon millions who instead choose NOT to reproduce. This is an amazing fact and is proof that we do not possess a sexual instinct like that seen in all other animals. As I will show in future blogs there are reasons why this control over our reproductive abilities exists, and why we continue to reproduce despite not being compelled to do so by any internal, genetically programmed drive. For those who want to jump ahead and read my published paper on human sexuality, go to .

There is further dramatic proof that human beings lack a sexual instinct – the capability within out species for exclusively homosexual individuals to exist, and the supreme lack of it in all other species. It is true that homosexual activity has been routinely observed in over 450 species of animals (and counting), but there have been no exclusively homosexual animals ever observed in natural settings. Any animal that has been observed to engage in homosexual activity has – as a rule – also been observed to mate with an individual of the opposite sex when its sexual instinct was called into action.

So humans are the only species where exclusively homosexual subgroups can exist – where individuals can be truly homosexual. This is indirect proof that the sexual pheromones which trigger a heterosexual mating response in all other species of animals must clearly not exist in human beings. The grand conclusion here is that we humans have risen above animal sexuality, having lost our sexual instinct sometime in the course of human evolution. We thus as a species don’t have an instinct to reproduce, or to engage in heterosexual intercourse, and have the ultimate reproductive freedom.

Do you agree or disagree with my point of view? Have your say. Add your comments below and be part of the discussion.

If you want to read a full theory of why humans lack a sexual instinct, and why we are the only animals on earth lacking one, go to my website .

3 Responses to “Do human beings possess a sexual instinct?”

  1. Late comment.

    Humans definitely have a sexual instict.

    The definition of the word “Instinct”: “Instinct is generally understood as the innate part of behavior that emerges without any training or education in humans.”

    I bet that if you put two a girl and a boy who are sexually mature and who doesn’t have any education or training and put them in a room together, they would most likely figure out sex.

    The occurance of exclusive non-hetero suxuality is not due to loss of sexual instict but rather a result of the social development of human behaviour. Although that assumes that sexuality is a result of environment and not genetics, and there are differencing opinions about that.

  2. Instinct has simply been defined out of existence by early psychologists for political reasons. If everything was instinct then psychologists would have nothing to do as instinct is biological not psychological. The argument that because humans have an intellect they cannot have instincts is no argument at all. The reason is it puts eating food on the same level as playing chess. I know you will say that is a drive not an instinct but again that is just using a definition to avoid the issue. Your proof that sex is not a instinct is falsified by and number of animals including Dolphins and Bonobos. I will concede that yours is the official view and it has to be respected but most people outside the field of psychology disagree with it.

  3. Political expediency? Get real! If anything, the concept is rejected because people actually care about logic and integrity. If all behaviors are instinctual, which necessarily must include learning and language, then the term is rendered absolutely meaningless. Morality is thus a fabrication and we’re basically just slaves of genetic mechanisms who oddly enough decided that all of our theories and “discoveries” are true beyond our species’ perspective. Therein you see the failure of the dogma of relativism – a terrible consequence of the fallacious biological determinism that fuels much of “science”.

    It’s clear which community is concerned with expediency and convenience. Whatever “works” to keep the populace distracted from dealing with the real issues directly – the existential angst, which sadly the “spiritual” communities evade as well by taking refuge behind “God”. This is why homosexuality is so scapegoated. It provides a distraction from dealing the guilt and anxiety of being alive without an objective purpose and then going ahead and summoning up another life to experience the same. It’s easy to be blind when there is uniformity.

Leave a Reply