Maslow's First Level, sex?

Published

I get the whole maslow thing. The first level is stuff you MUST have to survive, air, water, food, excretion..... But how is sex included in that list? I have gone a year without sex and....I'm still alive.....

Seems like it should be in the "love and belonging" category...

It does, but not for the same reasons - there are specific reasons why it (for example)appears in the first step and third step.

sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

True - but sometimes not:-) Too many variables for this to be just about one thing. What role(s) does this play with intimacy, relationships, committment? What role(s) does this play in procreation? Certainly there are some overlapping factors...you need attraction (to trigger arousal), you need it to be pleasant/pleasurable (or what would our population be today if it hurt or was otherwise laborous), You need to feel good about yourself (or the functionality may become impaired)...But some of this falls under both critical to the survival of our species as well as self serving by way of helping attain a better sense of life fullfillment. A lot of people what that intimacy and committment beyond the need for having children - that is why this gets listed in more than one step of Maslow's Pyramid.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
True - but sometimes not:-) Too many variables for this to be just about one thing. What role(s) does this play with intimacy, relationships, committment? What role(s) does this play in procreation? Certainly there are some overlapping factors...you need attraction (to trigger arousal), you need it to be pleasant/pleasurable (or what would our population be today if it hurt or was otherwise laborous), You need to feel good about yourself (or the functionality may become impaired)...But some of this falls under both critical to the survival of our species as well as self serving by way of helping attain a better sense of life fullfillment. A lot of people what that intimacy and committment beyond the need for having children - that is why this gets listed in more than one step of Maslow's Pyramid.

sex is a physical act of one type or another. it has different meaning for different people. the differences are not necessarily dysfunctions indicating a need for intervention. they are variations within the human experience. feeling good about oneself is not predictive of nor prerequisite to sexual experience. on the contrary, those with the highest levels of sexual activity are often the most emotionally unhealthy.

sex should be part of a healthy intimate relationship involving commitment (and procreation, to meet the need of the species). unfortunately, today, it is often the impetus of such, rather than the penultimate fulfillment of, as in past.

sex is one of those tricks nature uses to keep our species alive. it is pleasurable and hormonally driven during prime childbearing years, and is fun enuf to keep couples together until the child's basic survival needs are met. once prime childbearing years are passed it can remain fun enuf to provide some of the glue that keeps couples together, or it can lose it's interest.

unfortunately, the drives in modern men and women are not balanced. male drive is highest in the late teens tru 20's, and female drive is highest in the mid-late 30's, long after women (in general) have lost the attractiveness that stimulates their mates. hence the popularity of may-september romances. older men are more visually and tactilly stimulated by younger women, and younger men are attracted to anything that holds still long enuf to copulate with (including less attractive older women).

human beings were not designed to live to 70 years of age. they were designed to live to 35-40 years of age. once they are past this natural expectancy, all kinds of strange things begin to happen.

in any case, maslow's heirarchy is not a fixed reality. it is just a model that provides common basis for discussion, and within it is found about 70% of the truth about people.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I have a feeling we're actually in agreement but just don't realize it

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
The reason I stand by my statement that sex as a basic need pertains to procreation is because procreation is truly the only reason a functionally healthy sexual pattern is necessary. If not for that, we would find another way to express our need to be close with someone, as prescribed by the love and belonging level.

I don't know how you can say that unless you were the one who designed the whole thing. There's no way to know how humans would relate and love if there was no need to procreate on the macro level.

It does, but not for the same reasons - there are specific reasons why it (for example)appears in the first step and third step.

Kind of like if you had a sore knee that you decided not to have checked out. You favor it until something else starts to fail...perhaps lower back pain. You can surmise that 1) these are both related the functionality of mobility, 2) one issue may have caused the other...but 3) one issue is not the other...they most likely require seperate interventions to help acheive optimal mobility function and one may require a higher order of importance than the other...just our discussion, being able to have the confidence to enter a relationship and whether or not you're shooting blanks are two different issues, even if there are common underlying factors

To go along with the analogy here, not everyone would feel the "sore knee" in the first place. Having the necessary equipment to have sex does not equal wanting or needing to have sex. Nor does it mean that if you don't have a "sore knee" (want sex) will some other part of you fail as a result of you not going out to have sex when you have no desire to do that. The theory has been put to good use by people who want sex from someone who isn't interested "but I need it" and as a disparaging comment to women "she really needs to get laid". Well, no she doesn't need to get laid unless she wants to. Nor will a person of either sex sprout warts on their nose from the unrelieved stress of being horny with no takers.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

This should be called reproduction instead of sex.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CNA.
The "Americans are uptight about this" cliche has been around since Kinsey at least. I'm not sure what it is that other countries do that makes Americans "uptight" in your view.

Can you tell me a little about how sex education is viewed in other developed countries as opposed to America? What are the rates of condom use and STD spread in the US as opposed to other developed countries? How about how women's breasts are obsessed over in America as opposed to others?

Are US Nurses more or less likely than nurses in other Western countries to directly address and treat sexual dysfunction?

The religious right in America has a lot to do with unhealthy American attitudes toward sex. The Catholic Church is currently telling people in AIDS ravaged countries that using condoms is wrong. This is more than just how someone views sex, this is genocidal stupidity.

This list could go on and on and on, but is getting away from the topic.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Btw, just a small point as an aside - is sex and sexual intimacy the same thing? Because that's what the first and third levels have respectively...I'm going to side with they're not the same thing and even more so, support my prior arguments...:D

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.

To begin, let's take a couple of steps back here. A review:

You and many others seem to be interpreting the placement in Maslow based only on how often someone has sex. This is a mistake, it is based on whether a person is able to function sexually. It is the function part that puts it in the base category..

Whether a body system functions or not does not determine it's place in the pyramid. All the systems of the body must function to their optimum level ideally. In fact, basic sexual function can't occur until the real foundational needs are met which adds further credence to it holding a secondary place in the pyramid. If the endocrine, circulatory, digestive and nervous systems aren't working, sexual function will not, but if the sexual system isn't functioning it normally won't cause the others not to work. (excluding injury or acute conditions affecting the reproductive organs)

Americans in general are overly uptight about this, which makes this a very good conversation to have.

I asked you what you meant by this statement because not only does it use an inexact colloquialism from the 60s but sweeps a couple hundred million people into the "uptight"category. You made the assertion. It's not appropriate for you to ask me to go out and do a bunch of time consuming research to prove or disprove your point for you. How about you go out and post the links you think are evidence of your position being the right one?

If it's your opinion based on nothing in particular but your observance of a small segment of people or anecdotal stories and books you've read then just say so.

I can tell by the homework assignments you gave me to prove your point for you that likely you have a set of beliefs and are looking for concrete evidence to back it up. You might find it, who knows? Your credibility will be much greater if you do.

So. . .

Can you tell me a little about how sex education is viewed in other developed countries as opposed to America?

What are the rates of condom use and STD spread in the US as opposed to other developed countries? How about how women's breasts are obsessed over in America as opposed to others?

Are US Nurses more or less likely than nurses in other Western countries to directly address and treat sexual dysfunction?

The religious right in America has a lot to do with unhealthy American attitudes toward sex. The Catholic Church is currently telling people in AIDS ravaged countries that using condoms is wrong. This is more than just how someone views sex, this is genocidal stupidity.

My opinion on the religious right- their attitude toward GLBT people is painful.

The Catholic Church - you must have realized the harm they do with absurd and murderous pronouncements about condom use hurts people in those AIDS ravaged countries, and others with large Catholic populations without access to proper healthcare or safe sex education by orders of magnitude more than the Catholic Church in America. I was raised Catholic, too. But you're right. That is a topic for another day.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Society's effect does have a place in this discussion - since there are many aspects (religious beliefs, moral implications that are generally society driven, etc, etc, etc). Heck, even as roles of men and women change in terms of career choices/opportunities affect how/when/if they enter a relationship with full committment.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Emergency Dept. Trauma. Pediatrics.
Basic need for a man.

Love & Belonging for a woman.

:-0)

LOL I wouldn't leave it at just a man on the first one. Some woman feel it's a big need as well more than just love and belonging. :p

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I'm feeling too lazy to read through this whole thread. It's probably been said numerous times, but I think sex is referring to sex for procreation purposes. That is how it was explained to my class.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion