Sexual Morality

The last section of the course explores “Sexual Morality,” a topic about which most of my students have given a lot of thought.  We’re testing the limits of the ‘Harm Principle’. Are any choices between consenting adults to share sexual intimacies violations of the ‘harm principle’?  So long as those intimacies are consensual, and shared in private, could they still be “wrong” (morally)?  And if so, by what principle?

If the intimacies shared are consensual, then it would seem that they cannot be violations of either ‘harm to others” or “harm to self.”  So, it seems for those who regard certain sexual touches and exchanges to nevertheless be “immoral” they must be some violation of “impersonal harms”.  In the first section of the course, we considered such alleged violations as “free-floating evils.”  This meant that while no “harms” were identified as assault, rape, robbery, murder, some sort of harm is still alleged.  Perhaps that the community is somehow corrupted? Or ?  And so I urge you to be thoughtful and cautious before you stand in the way of others or authorize others to stand in their way — issuing liberty limiting restrictions.  Let me press this point by an analogy.

I urge you in this last section to think of sexual intimacies by analogy with going to a dessert buffet! Sexual activities can be viewed as expressions of “appetite.” We have a hunger for certain kinds of touches and caresses.  Now at the dessert buffet, some like cookies, some like cakes, others like pies, and of course for those who love ice cream sundaes, there are many different kinds of mix-ins and combinations. Those who like nut pies (e.g. pecan pie) with whipped cream like a combination of crunchy, sweet, and fluffy.  Those who like fruit pies have different preferences. For those who like brownies some prefer milk-chocolate and others dark-chocolate.  I hope you see the point that there are many different preferences.  Could anyone of these choices consensually made be “wrong” (morally)?  If so, be prepared to make an argument about “free-floating evils.”  But caution:  If your religion, your ethnicity, your family “rules” — that you believe in faithfully — identify some sexual intimacies as “wrong,” by all means refrain from engaging in them.  But since not all of us are members of that religion or ethnicity or your family, then those “reasons” are inadmissible to justify standing in the way of others.  Just to be clear, our approach would not support others who sought to stand in the way of YOUR selection of consensual sexual intimacies because others objected on the ground of THEIR religious, ethnic, or family rules.