A Liberal View of Sexual Morality

Based on Thomas Mappes, “On Sexually Using Another Person, “

in Mappes and Zembaty, eds., Social Ethics: Morality and Public Policy, McGraw-Hill, 2002.

(Updated March 20, 2008)

Heroes: People who are honest, keep their promises, and respect the freedom of others.

Demons: Rapists, liars, manipulative people; exploiters of children, mentally handicapped, and economically vulnerable persons

We may never treat another person as a means only. (based on Kant’s Categorical Imperative)

On Mappes’ account, those who follow this principle respect the autonomy of other persons (to the extent that they are autonomous) and follow the principle “do no harm” where autonomy is lacking.

Moral Failure occurs:

A. when the other party is unable to give voluntary informed consent because he or she is

1. under age (immature),

2. incompetent from mental retardation, or

3. temporarily disordered by alcohol or drugs

B. when the other party is autonomous but her autonomy is undercut.  This second type of failure can occur in a numb of ways:

1. Deception (All deception is intentional.)

a. Lying or  misrepresentation: stating what is not the case or making a gesture that conveys such a statement (e.g., saying one is single when one is not, saying one has been recently checked for STD’s and is clean, when this is not true)

b. Withholding relevant information (=failure to disclose)

2. Coercion

a. Occurrent coercion: involves the direct use of physical force (e.g., forcible rape)

b. Dispositional coercion: normally involves the threat of harm (but coercive offers too seem to be cases of dispositional coercion)

i. Uncontroversial cases: some forms of rape; quid pro quo sexual harassment

ii. Offers are often non-coercive (Target of offer is not worse off if he/she refuses)

iii. Note: The fact that A has an intense desire for something B can offer A in return for sex does not make the transaction coercive.  Key idea: WANT (The case of Starlet and Moviemogul.)

c. Coercive Offer: Exploitation of economically vulnerable adults.

(The case of Mr. Troubled and Ms. Opportunistic). Key idea: NEED.

Note that by these criteria sex for mutual gain that does not involve deception or coercion of either partner or third parties is not morally wrong (even if it might be foolish for either or both of the two  parties participating).  Conservative sexual moralists would be sure to disagree at this point.

Discuss: From this perspective (i) why is sex with minors, mentally retarded persons, and people who are drugged normally (morally) wrong? (ii) why is adultery normally wrong? (iii) is homosexual sex necessarily wrong? (iv) is being a prostitute or a client of a prostitute always wrong?