Monday, December 19, 2005

Dinner Parties and Darwin

As everyone knows, sublimated libido is the engine of social life. It is for this reason that the traditional salon worked so well: the male guests channeled their frustrated desire for the hostess into sparkling conversation with each other. Thus when throwing a party, you should always invite people who are sexually unsatisfied—in other words, single people. Single people create what I call “Single Person Energy,” the magic ingredient in any successful soiree.

The phenomenon of “SPE” has a simple Darwinian explanation. People who are trying to get laid become funnier and more interesting. Thus singles sparkle in a way that most couples do not. (Sadly, many people lose their luster once they find a mate.)

But here is the magic of SPE: it doesn’t matter if the pursuit of sex is real or hypothetical. Even if they aren’t attracted to each other, your single guests will make each other more animated. The couples present are not trying to seduce your single guests (although in San Francisco, anything is possible). Nonetheless the presence of the singles will make the couples more convivial. Single people seem to induce a sexual competitiveness, a kind of biological reflex, making everyone burn a little brighter, drink a little more, stay a little later.

As bay leaves are to gumbo, so are single people to parties: you throw them in and let them simmer away, adding their savor. Just as you take out the bay leaves and put them on the side of your plate, so at the end of the party, you put the singletons in taxis. Of course, occasionally two of your singletons may hook up. While happy for them, this is sad for you. Then they may become another boring couple, and worse, yet, they may move to the suburbs.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Jeffrey said...

Plus, there's always the added benefit that you can take one of the hot, single women to bed with you and your partner.

1:25 PM  
Anonymous Mark said...

Maybe single people aren't necessarily sexually unsatisfied, and couples certainly aren't necessarily sexually satisfied. I wonder what the probablility would be of sexual satisfaction in a couple vs outside a couple.

I've read that the biological inclination is for men to spread their sperm to as many women as possible (and also to prevent other men from spreading their sperm to the same women, through not only physical but chemical means), and for women to collect sperm from as many sources as possible, preferably within a 72 hour period, so the sperm can fight and the best mate will prevail.

But, is the satisfaction of our primal biological inclinations the same as sexual satisfaction?

...and is it sexual frustration or freedom to pursue the biological inclination that is the source of the single person energy?

I'm just posing questions here. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

9:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home