It is absolutely certain that our ancient ancestors were not sexual the way we are (penis and vagina). In fact, the living cells that we are made of aren't sexual. They divide and become two cells. Nothing remotely sexual about that.

Sex only appears in multicellular creatures, and even then it doesn't always happen.

I vaguely recall reading a paper or two about the rise of sex as a method of reproduction on Earth, but I can't recall much in the way of details. I'd recommend you research it if you find it interesting enough.

I was pondering. (amoung many others). At some time the maleand female split from a single union. But, after they evolve to be compatable at all stages of evolution. In this case, the pair is evolving alond side each other remaining compatable. What's interesting in this regard, wouldn't they evolve each along their own paths and loose simularity. They didn't take seperate evolutionary pathways. If they did they would be drastically different then each other today. What's amazing is, the split creates two seperate persons, each of their own volitions. (personal will). That means that evolution acted the same on both even tho being seperate.

I'm thinking that all life started from one common beginning of a singular biostructure and all life from that beginning goes it's ways to form everything other. I'm looking at everything beginning with a plant, and the plant at some point changing to flesh, and flesh then taking off into each's direction.

I got off on this (again) while sitting under the Oak Tree in my yard to watch the birds and chipmunks. The Oak lets off the male flower after polination and they drop off afterward (because it's spring). So I got to thinking this once again. When contemplating a flower and how they reprodice it seems similer to the same structure as we have for reproduction, but of course more-so basically. The pollin travels down a small tube to set the process in motion. The same with mammals. The sperm travels down a small tube to encounter the egg cell. The structure of both female apparatus is the same. So, I got to comtemplating that our ancestor may have been a plant that changed genetics to cause things to go in our direction. As you can see i'm not up to snuff on biology or evolution, but simularities may mean common ancestor.

How likely is it that a plant evolved to flesh as both work off of DNA. Would the DNA of plants combine with ours in a lab, and if so then all DNA is of the same origin or it wouldn't be possible. That's my thinking and may not be actual processes. It's likely as I understand it that plants came first, or at least after the single cell. If the DNA can be combined then it's likely our ancester was a plant. I find it hard to see that many different things developed on their own in the primeval pool.

At some time the Male and female splitt to form two seperates. That also means all other males and females from bugs to whales.

This is what happens when someone retires and has alot of time to mull.

Well once you depend on sex for reproduction, you must remain compatible with the opposite sex or go extinct. If any species reliant on sex started to evolve the sexes in incompatible directions, the species would die.

There are significant differences between male and female, in some species more than others. But they are still and will always be the same species. There's definite limits on how different they can be without dying out.

that if the pair evolved differently life would die out. There's seems to be some kind of link that keeps the pair evolving together. Something is carrying along the the genetic compatibility. Maybe it's a co-habitation thing. If we hang together we evolve together. But that would incorporate something more then just genetics. Something like George Washington stated, we hang together or we hang seperatly.

why the male-female didn't evolve in different directions after the split. Any slight change in genetics contributing to evolving would be passed to the offspring. Lets say for instance, a slight evolutionary change in one isn't enough change to matter drastically as evolution is a slow process. The small change being passed to offspring keeps the male-female generations in line with the paired genetics. That means that neither can go off on thier own,  each offspring is in line with changes of both by inheiriting traits from both making the evolving process stable. 

You relayed to me something I didn't know about viruses, in how they multiply.