Isn't it rather the reverse? What in vitro fertilization is to sex, perhaps. It purports to offer the underlying biological benefits, but you have to give up the pleasurable sensations that normally attach to eating food.
I suppose really it's more complicated than that. You have (1) the biological need, which via evolution gives rise to (2) the pleasant sensations, and then cultural processes produce (3) all sorts of other stuff -- culinary traditions, sexual taboos, etc. And also (4) the usual way of satisfying the need and/or getting the pleasant sensations may be time-consuming or expensive or inconvenient.
Soylent removes 2, 3, 4. Blow-up dolls remove 1, 3, 4. IVF removes 2, 3, 4. (You might want to add "mostly" to some of those.) Make of that what you will.
None of the above removes the biological need. Both Soylent and blow-up dolls satisfy the biological need.
Do note that humans have the biological need to have sex, not to impregnate (or be impregnated). Otherwise birth control would be a non-starter.
Previous Open Thread
You know the drill - If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one.
3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.
4. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.