Avril 2007 Sex and Morals

Ignorance is our worst evils source

Body/ psychology / history / society / love, /philosophy / moovies / art / books / bib liographies / Archives / Links / Contact

New papers each month

Sex and Morals

Morals has several outcomes, among these, sexuality regulation in reference to the “good” to the “evil”, defined by social ideologies and religions, take a large place. We shall look at some basic concepts: sexual freedom, human dignity, human nature, assent
Maximalists and Minimalists two actual different points of view

Maximalists and minimalists
Sexual Freedom
Sexual Freedom in couple
Is pornography immoral?
Is masturbation immoral?
Is prostitution immoral?
These disturbing sexual minorities
Bibliography

Corps et Physiologie / Psychologie et Sexualité / Histoire /Société/ Amour, Érotisme, Fantasmes/Philosophie /Cinéma / Littérature Archives / Arts / Notes de lecture / Liens /Bibliographies

Maximalists and Minimalists two actual different points of view
Among all the human behaviours, sexuality is probably one of the most deeply and easily modified by culture. The absence of sexual activity does not directly threaten survival, one does not die if one does not make love, on contrary, if one stop feeding for a too long time, the life could be stopped. The moral standards in all the cultures have always affected sexuality. With our Occidental point of vue, we evaluate the rigour or the laxism of a culture according to several criteria. Who is authorized to have a sexual life? Do the partners choose themselves or is the choice imposed to them? Who decide? According to what? With which aims?
Do we feel like live in a world where we would be constantly protected from ourselves? In this world even our thoughts could be considered as immoral. Science fiction imagined such societies, the eye of Big Brother fixed on our life, the crimes revealed before they are made, the confessor who punishes without pity those who are guilty even of a light moral deviance… Do this belong anymore to science fiction when today one accuses and excludes those who do not respect the recommended virtuous behavior: smokers for examples. Certain behaviors are denounced like bad in the name of often doubtful principles: smoking, eating, being lazy, masturbation, and other sexual practices supposed to threaten human nature or dignity... The problem is that in name of nature, freedom, dignity we can find every positions from an extremity to another. Everybody refers to assent, but some considers that a “yes” means “no” , specially when a man requires a woman’s assent.

Nowadays, two positions can be elicited. A first one refers to Aristote, Kant and, monotheism theology. This is the maximalist point of view, it requires a strict control of behaviours and do not make a difference between what people do to themselves and what they do to other people. For example masturbation is a sin, sodomy is too.
A second position refers to Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Martha Nussbaum (Sex and social Justice, 1999). In France, the minimalist point of view is supported by Ruwen Ogien (philosopher, researcher).

Self and others
What you do to yourself, your body, your life, your health is deeply involved in morals for “maximalists”. So, this point of view prohibit suicide as a crime, prohibit smoking, getting drunk, using drugs, eating too much, becoming fat, being lazy and sensual oriented. All these restrictions reflect an idea of what a human being is supposed to represent. Is human a “piece” of god? Does people belong to a transcendent authority, so it is evident that they cannot be deciders for themselves, so embodiment of this transcendent authority has to assume this role, and protect people from themselves.
But, minimalist think that people are free and that they are able to decide what they want to do with themselves, with their lives and their sexuality. The only rule is to avoid doing any harm to others, it is what philosophers call the “harm principle” (Feinberg;J.Social Philosophy, Englewood Cliff, Prentice-Hall, 1973, p.25-26). So, what you do with yourself is not a moral subject, it does not mean that you have to threaten your life, only that you cannot be judged “immoral” for your choices. What you do with others requires their assent. About sexuality, practices needs that both partners are adults and are conscious of what they do and the consequences of it.

Maximalist’s questions
Philosophers and theologians both consider that the purpose of sexuality is reproduction; the sexual act is nothing but a necessary harm, excluding pleasure. In many religions, the only permitted sexual satisfaction is a pregnancy following the sexual intercourse: the duty is fulfilled . Generally, sexual pleasure is supposed to make use of somebody, in a way. The sexual partner is considered as an object, not a human being. In the case of masturbation, it is the same, if you practice masturbation, you use yourself as an object. As we put that human is understood as a parcel of a transcendent referent, if you “use” anybody as an object, it also hurts the transcendent referent.
The main question is to established a standard for sexuality, even defining a sort of ideal, that ensures that nobody would be treated as an object. Another question is to establish what precisely means notions as human nature, or dignity...

Minimalist’s questions
Philosophers consider that sexual practices that involve adults able to freely decide what they want, do not deserve any moral evaluation. If sexual pleasure is your purpose nobody is allowed to judge it. The main problem is to be sure that your choices do not hurt anybody in anyway. You could accept something because you have no other choice at this moment. The most radical point of view put that people are ideally free and conscious of their behaviours, the moderate point of view suppose that sexual relation should be strong and fulfilling, it means that short relations like speed dating could be judged as immoral...

What is sexual Freedom? Free regarding what? who benefits of freedom? What sort of “good” does freedom bring? Who is allowed to be sexually free?

Sexual freedom brings the question of relation between body and society. In other words, you are sexually free when you decide about the way you use your body in sexual activities. It means that your social environment does not decide for you. Family, religion authority, state do not influence your decisions about your own sexuality, except if it could harm anybody. From this point of view, we have to know when a person is able to decide and choose. For example, in France, a person is major at 18 years old, but the “sexual” majority is only 15 years old.
Michel Foucauld,(histoire de la Sexualité, (1976-1984) French philosopher, showed how society models sexual behaviours and how official morals refering to judeo christian tradition is present in each of our decisions. So, is sexual freedom really possible?
Freud, Levi-Strauss, Kinsey, White provide descriptions of sexual behaviours from psychological, anthropological and sociological point of view. Long before, pioneers in Sexology Krafft Ebing, Magnus Hirschfeld, and Havelock Ellis, tried to have a scientific look on sexual behaviour. The purpose was to show that sexuality is natural and healthy, to push away obscurantism, and to encourage freedom, specially for woman for whom sexuality and pain in her body and in her mind were strongly associated. These scientists tried also to help homosexuals, they did not judge their behaviour from morals standards but began to present it as a disease, it was not perfect, but better than being treated as criminals, and it was the first step towards sexual freedom.

Women, children, sexual minorities
Sexual freedom seems to be very different according to cultures, we tend to measure it regarding women, children, and sexual minority status. In many cultures, they still are not consider as human, but as animals or goods for trading. There is no sexual freedom for these people, families, husbands, brothers, contribute to maintain them in slavery. To days, In some countries, women and children are sold by their families and become prostitutes...

The conditions of sexual freedom

Money
In occidental cultures, women access to freedom, they earn money and can use it. In France, women were not allowed to manage their properties when they were married, women who had to work also had to give their wages to their husband or parents or brothers... Only since 1965, women can work without their husband assent.
Contraception
Nowadays, women are allowed to manage their fecundity, contraception is now considered as a right, except in countries dominated by religious power like Poland for example where abort is prohibited since 1993 (from 1955, abort was legal and free).

Sexual freedom and standards
During the sixties, we believed that sexuality could be liberate from morals standards, but we were wrong. Politics uses most of these standards without referring to religion. Daniel Borilho, lawyer and researcher has written several books about these topics, he explains that judges do not invoke anymore religious reference but replace it by other transcendental entities. In fact, they seem to know better than you what is good for you. This is typically a paternalist attitude. Ruwen Ogien precise that we are in a paradox situation. On one hand, we have more sexual freedom, adultery or homosexuality are not sins anymore, on another hand, sex crimes repression had considerably increased specially in France. The philosopher precise that he does not think that sexuality with assent is allowed and sexuality without assent is punished, he brings the evidence arguing that if our sexual life was depending on assent, some choices should not be considered as crimes: some sort of prostitution, surrogate mothers, sadomasochist games...
Eric Fassin, a french sociologist, specialist of gender studies author of ” L’inversion de la question homosexuelle”, defends the minimalist point of view and analyses relations between sexuality and politics. He put that the role of a state is to protect a “sexual democracy” and individuals freedom. Standards seems to be constitutive of sexual life, sexuality and gender are strongly related to power and domination. So instead of avoiding or ignoring these data, it seems more pragmatic to deal with them.

Sexual freedom in couples.
Moral focuses on several questions and specially about fidelity and violence. A recent new in Germany draw our attention. A couple from Morocco, but living in Germany, is going to separate. The woman is victim of violence from her husband; his culpability is evident, and this affair can be solved quickly. Except that the German Judge refuses the woman’s quest for divorce, arguing the “right of punishment” of the Coran. She adds, that married with a Muslim this woman should have known that she risked such treatment. This news has been revealed by the Frankfurter Rundschau who precises, that this case has been removed from this judge, who ignored that moroccan law condemn husbands who beats their wife...
In Germany, “honor” crimes killed more than 50 women for last ten years... Curiously, men are never the victims of such crimes. In France, each month,13 women are killed by their husband or their friend, each year 2 millions are victim of violence. This year, every 3 days, a woman dies because of couple violence.

The first case of rapt in couple has been judged in France in 1990. It means that before, husbands could do what they wanted, under the pretext of “conjugal duty”, so wives were often treated as sexual slaves. We must remember that each time we discuss about sexual freedom. The role of moral is to point out that everybody should benefit of an equal consideration as a human being, either male or female. Moral has also to play a didactic role, teaching that the power of others is the power we accept to undergo.

A tacitly accepted couple contract
There is also another type of contract, the moral one that is tacitly lying between husbands. Generally, they are not plenty conscious of it, except when it is transgressed by one of them. Love affair, sexual practices, are the main subjects of transgression that lead couple towards rupture. To avoid this, it is necessary to install a hight quality dialog in couple, but that requires to recognize the other as an equal, in other words, mutual respect.

The main cause of divorce in France is infidelity. The infidel, either wife or husband is accused, his (her) behavior is considered as an injury and provides a good pretext for giving up... We do not think that infidel husband (or wife) plans to offense the other when he (she) has a sex affair outside the union. We think that this person is probably searching pleasure, or fun, having good time in a other relation frame. Some infidelities help to maintain the couple. Shall we stay trapped in hypocrisy? What could be the role of moral in the situation of infidelity? Probably moral can help husbands to make the difference between intention and behavior. Moral also can help couples in making a more realistic definition of their relation, purposes and means...

True lies or false truth?
According to Emmanuel Kant, we should never lie, but sometimes, we face dilemmas: if we lie, we have to cope with shame or others bad feelings; but if we do not lie, it can hurt deeply the other, so wa also have to cope with shame and feel guilty... Moral can help us to know what is really important and then to make a decision which respects this priority in the present and in the future. Then, moral can also help us to assume our choices...

Is pornography immoral? In name of what? Is a moral correct pornography possible?

Pornography brings to our eyes scenes that belong to intimacy and fantasy. Pornographic movies become more and more violent, and easily accessible, even to children and teenagers. If morals have to play a role in pornography, it probably consists in making differences between what can be showed, hidden, and how can it be showed. Obviously, the question of assent is present specially because pornography involves people: sex workers and clients.
Morals can also keep us awake to respect the “harm principle”, sex workers need to be precisely conscious of their acts and their consequences. For example, safe sex should be a standard for pornographic movies, both for protecting sex workers health, and to transmit pictures of safe sex. Some pornographic movie producers, as Ovidie in France, are engaged in such a way.

In fact, to day, we can see a wave of very violent pornographic movies called gonzo. These movies say that they show “reality”, as the “girl next door” and her friends. These sex workers could be your neighbours. The camera rarely shot faces, but focuses on sexual organs. These movies can last about 3 hours... and are very appreciated by clients...
When the spectator leaves berner and believes that these films are kinds of documentary, the danger is large. Indeed, the naive spectator can think that if others did it, he is also allowed to do it, or worse, to require it from his partners. In an essay intitled “gang bang Enquête sur la pornographie de la démolition”, Frederic Joignot, journalist, shows that gonzo change people into pictures, so that a rapt or a “bukkake” appear to be something normal or for fun. So these pictures could act as an authorization to pratice what they show.. The great danger of these films is to become references. Morals must say very clearly that these films as others more “traditional” are not reality, makes some they are very far, it is the cinematographic style of writing to the manner of a report which induces in error. It is thus a heavy error to think that the pornographic films represent reality or of the models for sexuality.

The distance between reality and pornography should be enhanced and become a sort of rampart against the violent drifts. Instead of making movies with sexworkers, it could be possible to produce animation movies. Actually, it’s possible to find a large choice of porno “manga” that shows everything but reality... The video games take a important place in the collective imagination and fantasy, so they also could be use for pornographic style entertainment.

The pornographic expression brings the question of human dignity, usually, human dignity is insured if the person is treated as human, and not as an animal or an object. But how can we know if one is treated as an object? When a person is treated as a slave, that is to say a “good”, it is obvious... But there are many others complicated situations. For example, if you and your partner appreciated erotic role playing and imagine scenes where one of you is treated as a pleasure object, do you think that your human dignity is safe?
Many questions about pornography leads to representations of sex, of pleasure, and the distinction between body and soul giving noble roles to the soul and leaving vice to the body.

Is masturbation immoral? Does it hurt anybody? Doesn’t it respect the “harm principle?”

According to Emmanuel Kant, masturbation appears to be on the opposite of moral standards. Masturbation’s purpose is sexual pleasure, precisely, one’s own pleasure. Of course, the question of fidelity has nothing to do with masturbation. It can be considered as a very safe practice, because you do not risk any IST contamination. Masturbation is always practiced with a total assent, and of course, you do no have to pay for it. If we consider all these arguments, masturbation appear to be a very interesting activity, that respect the “harm principle”!
But, despite of these advantages, masturbation is still related with sin and shame. Regarding monotheism moral standards, masturbation is obviously a sin because it brings pleasure, and spread semen which should have been used for procreation!!! Sensual pleasure is supposed able to drive away from duty toward god, and now from other transcendent authority. If the “contains” change, the “container” does not.

Is prostitution immoral when sex workers put it in a claim?

A recent TV show on France 3 presented prostitutes and clients. These sex workers, a man and five women explained that they have freely and consciously decided to prostitute. A beautiful belgian woman in her fifties said that she was “made for this job”, two others in their thirties added that they gave up their jobs to become prostitutes. Franck Spengler, publisher, and Claude Dubois, historian, said they were clients of prostitutes for a long time. According to their account, they were both married and happy in family. They agree to say that they loved to have good time with prostitutes, and that this leisure had never threaten their family life. Is everything perfect in this picture, where everybody gently plays its role? ... Probably not.

According maximalist standards of moral, prostitutes are always victims, something or somebody had forced them to do this job. The assent of a prostitute is never strong enough and one can bring the evidence: rapt, psychological trauma or any other injure. If it is not done before, the job itself is able to destroy their human dignity.

According to minimalist standards of moral, people are able to choose what they think is good for them. If they decide to prostitute, one should not prevent them from doing it, otherwise, it should be an offense to human dignity, because their right of making free decision is denied.

These disturbing sexual minorities : Who is disturbed ?

The bisexual ones seem to attract on them the lightnings of morals! ARIANE Aubin, journalist in Montreal, asked to us some questions ; we deliver the answers to you.

- Is there a link between androgyny and bisexuality?
The mythical androgyny is a both male and female creature,a hermaphrodite and that does not imply that it is bisexual. According to the legend with which Plato refers in “the Banquet”, all the creatures are androgynous. It is only after having defied the Gods that Zeus decides to separate them (the word sex comes from Latin “secare” which means to cross, to divide…). This myth is used as metaphor to explain love: to find its “half”, its “soul mate”, in the purpose to reconstitute the original androgyny… Certain people have sexual malformations, it is about pseudo hermaphrodism, called sometimes “androgyny” and does not imply either bisexuality., even if that poses problems of construction of sexual identity. Other people, have a male genetic code but a female appearance, they are not bisexual for as much. If one speaks about androgyny to evoke the jamming of codes of appearance like clothing or the hairstyle, they are cultural phenomena. “Bi” does not characterize by an androgynous look.

- Are we all bisexual with a certain degree?
Each human being is equipped with female and male features whatever its biological sex. The cultural and psychological determinants of its development support or inhibit the expression of these features.

- Is the bisexuality an occult phenomenon in our society?
The bisexuality always existed and this since most ancient antiquity, it is true however that the morals based on monotheisms condemned and constrained the bisexual ones to hide or at least to be discrete. It seems that repression is less aggressive in the Western world of today, at least for people who do not subject their sexual choice to religious morals.

Is Bisexuality more disturbing than homosexuality? Is it a sexual orientation strictly speaking?
The bisexuality is perhaps more current than homosexuality, but certainly less conspicuous. In Europe for example, many countries recognize the unions between homosexual, and those, do not have to dissimulate their sexual way of life.

- Certain currents of thought (in particular the doctrines Marxist) regard the heterosexuality as an acquired behavior and not like a natural behavior. How you react to this assertion?
According to you, if education did not insist on heterosexuals behaviors as being the standard, would be there more the bisexual ones? The human ones, like all the other alive beings, are given to make survive their species, the heterosexual behavior appears thus like a basic data, it is biological reality. It is truth that the model of the heterosexual couple on which is based family is that which prevails in education. To speak about sex and gender requires to distinguish the contexts, if biological realities are evoked, the heterosexuality is normalized for reproduction. If one evokes the cultural aspects of the sexual identity, it is obvious that the heterosexuals behaviors become educational facts.

Freud considers that the human being oscillates all its life between poles of heterosexuality and homosexuality. Bisexuality would that be a transitory state between these 2 poles?
The intellectual positions of Freud must be understood in the context which saw them being born. One must also put the question need for the choice. What us constrained to pose labels “homo” “hétéro” or “Bi”? What would arrive if we refuse this certification? What one gains to be so identified?

- Is the bisexuality a problem of sexual identity? (psychological)
Initially, it would be interesting to know for who the bisexuality is a problem! One also can imagine that it is the more succeeded step of sexual fulfillment… The majority of “Bi” do not feel a problem of sexual identity, they are men and women who exert a choice. The bisexual orientation does not call in question their sexual identity. Problems of sexual identity express themselves especially among people who change sex because they have the feeling that their sex and their gender are opposed in a contradictory conflict.

- Do you think that exists really a distinct female and male identity with marked sexual roles?
You point out a current thought which leads to a desexualisation. Would this be because we all are basically different on the level from our sexual preferences?
There is a female and male identity which is both in construction and permanent deconstruction because modes of life evolve, and waitings change, like the criteria of personal fulfillment. There are indeed various currents of thought concerning the gender. There is initially a speech which denounces the differences and discriminations whose women are victims, then another which emanate from universalism and tends to remove the sexual identity, another finally, more recent put the accent on the individual differences, variety of the personal ways…

Did the prevalence of the bisexuality evolve with time? Can one consider the fact of having sexual adventures with individuals of the two sexes like bisexuality?
A thirty six years old man who had much suffered following his divorce, testifies today: “I know that I am able to love and share my life with somebody, a woman or a man that does not have importance, what counts are the reciprocal feelings…” In the post modern societies, the deconstruction of the traditional models and the rise of individualism support the expression of the bisexuality… The fact of having adventures with partners of the two sexes necessarily does not result in continuing like bisexual, but only people who are defined as such will be able to explain you the difference!

Bibliography

Laure Adler, Secrets d’alcôve; histoire du couple de 1830 à 1930, Pluriel, 1983
Jeremy Bentham, Essai sur la pédérastie, 1785. Défense de la liberté sexuelle. Les oeuvres complètes de Jeremy Bentham ont été publiées en 1845 en Belgique
http://bentham.free.fr/index.html
Daniel Borrillo, Jack Lang Homosexuels, quels droits, Dalloz-Sirey, 2007
Daniel Borrillo, Danièle Lochak, La liberté sexuelle, PUF, 2005
Roland Chemama et Bernard Vandermerch Dictionnaire de la Psychanalyse, Larousse (3e édition), 2003
Gilles Deleuze Qu’est-ce que la philosophie, Minuit, 2005
Philip K. Dick Minority report, publié en 1956, Gallimard, collection Folio SF, 2002
De la violence et des femmes, collectif sous direction de Cécile Dauphin, Albin Michel, 1997
Philip Jose Farmer, Les amants étrangers, publié en 1961, J’ai lu, 1999
Eric Fassin, L’inversion de la question homosexuelle, Amsterdam, 2005
FeinbergJ.Social Philosophy, Englewood Cliff, Prentice-Hall, 1973
Michel Foucault, Histoire de la sexualité (3 volumes) Gallimard, de 1976 à 1984
Frédéric Joignot Gang Bang enquête sur la pornographie de la démolition, Le Seuil, collection Non Conforme, 2007
E. Kant, Leçons d’éthique, publié en 1775
E Kant Métaphysique des moeurs, publié en 1785, Flammarion 1994
Jacques Lacan L’Ethique de la Psychanalyse, Le Seuil, 1959/60, puis 1986
Marcella Lacub, Patrice Maniglier, Antimanuel d’éducation sexuelle, Bréal, collection Antimanuels,2005
Michela Marzano Je consens donc je suis, PUF, 2006
Ruwen Ogien, Penser la pornographie, PUF, 2003
Ruwen Ogien, L’éthique aujourd’hui, Gallimard , collection Folio Essais, 2006
Geoges Orwell 1984, publié en 1949, Gallimard, collection Folio, 1972
Platon Le Banquet, Garnier Flammarion, texte antique souvent réédité, ici,1993
Kathy Souffron Les violences conjugales, Editions Milan, collection Les essentiels, 2000
John Stuart Mill De la liberté, publié en 1859, Gallimard, collection Folio, 1990