SOME CONCLUSIONS

Sexual ethics is a very difficult topic for philosophers because the subject evokes strong emotions in almost everybody. Most people will morally disapprove of, say, stealing, but deviant sexual behaviour (whatever you think that is) provokes more than disapproval – the reaction is more like disgust or outrage. Even thieves can, in a detached sort of way, recognise that stealing is wrong in general; they just think their acts of theft are justifiable or harmless in some way. However, our sexual identity is much more closely bound up with who we are and few people are comfortable with viewing their own sexual behaviour as generally deviant, perverted or wicked. Even paedophiles resist the idea that what they do is really wrong.

Another problem lies with the meaning attached to sexual relationships. Most of us agree on what “property” is and so we share a common idea of “stealing”. We might disagree on whether or not stealing can be justified in special circumstances (like the priest who advised poor people to shoplift from big supermarkets) but there is no such consensus about sex. For some people, sex is a magical, sacred or life-defining experience (or at least they believe it ought to be) and if you think this way then special moral rules surround the sexual act – it’s just not like any other sort of behaviour people get up to. For others, sex is just a particular type of social interaction and should follow the same rules as any other sort of social interaction – i.e. treat other people fairly, respect their wishes, don’t hurt them. The first view focuses on the dignity and special-ness of sex, but can easily turn into puritanism, bossiness and bigotry. The second view is much more open and tolerant, but can end up degrading sexual relations and denying them their nobility and significance. People from each viewpoint find it very hard to understand or sympathise with the other side. Philosophy is perhaps not in the business of deciding which view of sex is correct, but it can tease out the implications of each viewpoint and help people understand each other’s views.  

Further Reading:

Issues In Human Sexuality – Report fo the Church of England 2003.

Humanae Vitae (1968 Roman Catholic Encyclical).

Discussion of Humanae Vitae (Catholic Review).

The Harm Principle evaluated.