Well first of all let me clarify the “we,” by we, I’m talking about Americans, as well as any other culture where people are apparently afraid of their own bodies and desires. Yes there are social norms that must be obeyed with sex, but what doesn’t change is the awkward dance with dizzyingly different steps which two people must go through before it becomes clear that both people wish to have sex. In America, we men must first bashfully yet tactfully strike up a conversation, or in some manner first get to know the woman without even letting on that we are sexually interested for fear of the woman being frightened and running away. While for this to work the woman must obviously have some interest in the male, otherwise she wouldn’t even acknowledge him. The woman also, if she is sexually interested, may not let her desires become known, because it could earn her an undesirable reputation as being “easy” or a “slut.” All this occurs even before two people know each other. Then once an acquaintance is established the two often feel obligated to spend time to establish a relationship to develop a deeper connection or perhaps love. Love complicates things even further, because both may not actually love each other, but still desire to have sex, and so the two may fool themselves into thinking they are in love, just to have sex. Love is indeed a wonderful thing, but sex does not require love, just as being in love doesn’t require one to have sex. Sex can strengthen love, but it can also make it clear when love is not the true motivation for sex between two people. We seem to fear that sex without love is dirty, but why?
If two people knowingly, honestly, and being both of sound mind, decide to have sex safely, and in a manner that provides enjoyment for both people, where is the immorality? All three basic philosophical theories of ethics would be hard pressed to find a flaw in such activity. Aristotle’s theory, doing things that enhance one’s self and one’s society would be applied to show that that pleasure, and additional pleasure from pleasing another person lifts a person’s spirits, and allows them to do other activities with more zest and vigor. Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative demanded that people should do things that treat people equally and with respect. When two consenting people decide to have sex to please each other, and in doing so benefit each other equally and do so in a respectful manner, that rule is perfectly obeyed, and no harm is done. Finally there is John Stewart Mill’s theory of Utilitarianism, “the greatest good for the greatest number.” If happiness is the greatest good, and it can be derived from pleasure, sexual freedom, and being comfortable with one’s sexuality and a society being free to be sexual the greatest good is given to the greatest number. It is the few that make people feel guilty, or dirty, for a perfectly clean, beautiful, and moral activity, that are immoral.
As those philosophers described their theories of moral action, I believe it is equally beneficial to define immoral action. Immoral action obviously is harmful, and destructive. It can corrupt an individual, or a society. Immoral acts prevent equality and respect among people. Therefore what I believe to be the most fundamentally immoral act is to force one’s will upon another who does not desire it. Theft is forcing the victim to submit their property to the thief according to his will. Murder is forcing the victim to accept the murderer’s belief that the victim does not have a right to live. Rape is forcing the victim to submit to the rapist’s will. All immoral activity can be reduced to the same principle. Consensual sex however does not fall into the definition of immorality. So why then should we endure the immoral act of being forced to feel guilty or immoral for doing a morally acceptable act?
Well those opposed would say that because the two participants are not married. Their augment may also contend that sex being moral relies on the theory of evolution, that we are animals, and animal nature is ok. However these refutations are relying on the Bible stories, or if the Bible is the true word of God, the actual demands of God himself, and that God did not create us as sexual beings, sex is necessary because of the sins of Adam and Eve. This answers how sex became believed to be dirty. It is associated with sin. Adam and Eve didn’t even know they had the capacity to have sex until they were cast out of Eden, and when they realized their sexual nature they were supposedly shamed. Well then, I apparently have lost this argument to my own invented opposition. But wait; were Adam and eve even married? There was no priest to conduct the ceremony, and God didn’t go through the whole spiel with the couple. In fact it was God who gave Adam and Eve their sexual parts in the first place. Sure they noticed them after original sin, but they were there before, so the capacity to have sex is not associated with sin. Sex being sinful is a Christian concept any way. Islam for example, came after Christianity; it is fundamentally the same god, only with a new message, and a new prophet speaking it. The notion that sex is immoral was founded in the Christian concept of original sin. Therefore it is the misconception of original sin that is the source of society’s sexual insecurity. Hinduism for example, uninfluenced by Christianity, holds sex to be a beautiful and divine activity; an act that their gods should be thanked and praised for giving, and also an act that brings the participants closer to their god or gods.
So how can sex not be associated with sin, even if original sin were true? Well the original sin was attempting to possess knowledge that God knew human minds could not fully handle. When Adam and Eve acquired this knowledge against God’s will that was the sin. The knowledge of course was of good and evil. Which still proves true today, people can often not decipher what is truly good, and what is truly evil. People do what they think, or apparently know to be good, when it may actually be evil, or refrain from something which actually may be good, thinking it is evil. Sex is universally good if done morally with both parties consenting, whether it’s believed as a gift from God, or pure nature. The punishment of original sin, if the religious point of view is adopted, is merely not being able to comfortably enjoy God’s gift.
Sex therefore is something people should not fear, or find discomfort in discussing it. What people do to make one another happy and pleased is good, and should be encouraged? The discussion of it can help us to learn more about ourselves, and to relate to people better. We should not feel like we must repress a part of ourselves. It is that repression that leads to problems within an individual. Every person should feel free to learn all that there is to know about themselves, and the world around them, and we are sexual beings, and we deny all that we are by denying even a small portion of what makes us who we are.
No comments:
Post a Comment