> > One more critical link between the appetites for sex and food is this: > Both, if pursued without regard to consequence, can prove ruinous not > only to oneself, but also to other people, and even to society itself. > No doubt for that reason, both appetites have historically been > subject in all civilizations to rules both formal and informal. Thus > the potentially destructive forces of sex — disease, disorder, sexual > aggression, sexual jealousy, and what used to be called > "home-wrecking" — have been ameliorated in every recorded society by > legal, social, and religious conventions, primarily stigma and > punishment. Similarly, all societies have developed rules and rituals > governing food in part to avoid the destructiveness of free-for-alls > over scarce necessities. And while food rules may not always have been > as stringent as sex rules, they have nevertheless been stringent as > needed. Such is the meaning, for example, of being hanged for stealing > a loaf of bread in the marketplace, or keel-hauled for plundering > rations on a ship. > Society itself? Huh? How? Yes, sex between two people can affect other people (jealousy, revulsion, and what have you), but how does that generalise to society at large? And how does consumption of food affect any third person at all? Theft of a loaf is a case of theft. Plundering rations on a ship is a very special case. Quite a strained analogy, although the next bits of the article were interesting and largely on point.
-- Aadisht Khanna Address for mailing lists: [email protected] Personal address: [email protected]
