What would happen if every human being didn't have sexual feelings for other humans ?

[Balthazzar]

A hustler letters publication was sitting on a shelf one day, so I decided to purchase it. After taking it to the counter, a woman approaches to ring it up for me. She looks at the magazine, smiles and with almost a sigh of relief, looks at me and states "Finally, a peer". I think the potential for what you suggest is highly unlikely.

 

[Stan77]

What would happen if every human being didn't have sexual feelings for other humans ?​

I suspect they would have sexual feelings for other animals or objects. I guess it is anyone's guess how that would look like? I just remembered, don't some humans already practice non-human sex?

"Like let's say that everyone became board of sex would love still exist ?"

It will depend on what you mean by love. What do you mean? What does anyone mean when they use the word love? Is it as overused as the word god? Probably. Which means no one knows what the heck they are talking about?

 

[☆Dreamwind☆]

We'd die out as a species

 

[Dan From Smithville]

If things remained exactly as they are right now, maybe. But we're talking about hypotheticals here, not the current state of affairs.

We have no idea what would happen in such a scenario of sexual boredom. Eliminating the possibility of extinction based on the wider embrace of an existing technology is speculation just as extinction is speculation. But given that natural reproduction is based on sex, it is rational to conclude that if people lose interest in sex, the population would be poised to drop as succeeding generations produce fewer numbers of replacements. That drop may vary with groups depending on cultural factors and technology. But I think there is evidence in biology to show that it would drop. The sterile fly release technique provides some evidence to indicate that. Evidence from conservation where the reduction of the female population of game species used to control overpopulation has some insights to learn of our fate from. In both cases, interruption of sex is at a different aspect of sexual reproduction, but they do show that it can reduce populations.

We don't have artificial womb technology, so women would still be required to carry babies until that technology comes on line. If it did or could. Would this happen voluntarily or would it have to be forced on women? There are also economic issues to consider. Who would front the cost? Would only the affluent be able to afford to do it? Would the poorer population carry the babies of the wealthier portion?

Under natural conditions without any technological input, we would die off as a species with the subsequent loss of reproduction that disinterest in sex would lead to. Of course, now that we have freed up 90% of interest and efforts to put to other things, maybe all of that would happen quickly and we would have factory production of humans up and running in a comparatively short time and save our species.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

We don't have artificial womb technology, so women would still be required to carry babies until that technology comes on line.

Closer than one might think. The biggest problems with these sorts of wonderful technologies is religious extremists that oppose it for one reason or another. In such a hypothetical of sexual boredom, if there's anything that would kill us all it would be such beliefs and views.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Closer than one might think. The biggest problems with these sorts of wonderful technologies is religious extremists that oppose it for one reason or another. In such a hypothetical of sexual boredom, if there's anything that would kill us all it would be such beliefs and views.

To be of much use, it would have to be passed closer and into ready to go on line if necessary.

I agree. Extremist positions based on anything, but certainly on religion, are often black or white with no room for potential and possibility. They can and have done a good deal of damage.

I don't agree that it wouldn't mean extinction, but what you are talking about is technical fixes that humans have demonstrated to be good at. The Green Revolution is an example where previous ecologist predictions of dire consequences for our carrying capacity exceeding out productivity were overturned by an increase in our ability to produce. So it might not mean extinction, but that would loom large as a motivation and not much of a prize for failure.