Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Philosophy, in all its guises. => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on December 08, 2020, 08:37:39 PM
-
Too right
https://unherd.com/2020/12/men-do-not-have-the-right-to-sex/
-
Not sure how we arrive at this being sexual violence or why there is the suggestion that this is a dangerous man. Would there be any objection to a prostitute offering from her own volition a freebie?
-
Sex is not a right but a privilege when a couple are in a stable relationship.
-
Sex is not a right but a privilege when a couple are in a stable relationship.
Certainly don't agree with this. Sex is something that any consenting adults can do, regardless of the status of their relationship. It's neither a right or a privilege. It just is.
-
Certainly don't agree with this. Sex is something that any consenting adults can do, regardless of the status of their relationship. It's neither a right or a privilege. It just is.
Sorry, that reads as if you are ignoring the specific issue
-
Certainly don't agree with this. Sex is something that any consenting adults can do, regardless of the status of their relationship. It's neither a right or a privilege. It just is.
Whilst you might be able to do it, I think it very unwise to sleep around. It can cause unpleasant infections and unwanted pregnancies.
-
Whilst you might be able to do it, I think it very unwise to sleep around. It can cause unpleasant infections and unwanted pregnancies.
It was a response to a specific comment
-
Whilst you might be able to do it, I think it very unwise to sleep around. It can cause unpleasant infections and unwanted pregnancies.
Not if the people involved take sensible precautions.
-
Not if the people involved take sensible precautions.
Precautions don't always work. ::)
-
Precautions don't always work. ::)
Risk cannot be avoided in life, it can only be managed - each individual has to weigh up the risk that any particular avenue poses and make a judgement against their prediction of their own personal return on whether that risk is justified.
Walking in public risks being struck by a car or mugged, eating risks food poisoning or allergic reactions, investing money risks loss or gain... life is about managing those risks, not avoiding them.
O.
-
Too right
https://unherd.com/2020/12/men-do-not-have-the-right-to-sex/
What is "too right"? The article was not about men's rights to have sex with anybody they like or their rights to have sex with their wives even when they don't consent (rights that obviously don't exist), it was about the right of a man to have sex with another consenting adult and the duty (if it exists) of his care workers to find him a sexual partner. Frankly, even if it is legal, I don't think you could ask care workers to procure prostitutes.
-
Not sure how we arrive at this being sexual violence
The article seeks to draw a parallel with the recent innovation that if you have sex with your wife but she hasn't consented, it is rape.
or why there is the suggestion that this is a dangerous man.
I cannot share details on what exactly Z’s “inappropriate” behaviour has consisted of, but I can share facts that have already been reported in the press: that Z has spent several years in a specialist facility, detained under the Mental Health Act, and has told care workers that he has sexual fantasies involving violence and children, and so his care plan is therefore designed to prevent him coming into contact with children.
Would there be any objection to a prostitute offering from her own volition a freebie?
Not from me. Nor would I have an issue with her being paid. The entire problem seems to revolve around the question of whether the care workers can be compelled to procure a prostitute for this man. I would suggest "no" is the correct answer to that question, even if it's legal.
-
What is "too right"? The article was not about men's rights to have sex with anybody they like or their rights to have sex with their wives even when they don't consent (right that obviously don't exist), it was about the right of a man to have sex with another consenting adult and the duty (if it exists) of his care workers to find him a sexual partner. Frankly, even if it is legal, I don't think you could ask care workers to procure prostitutes.
Apologies for my lack of clarity. I agree with what you write.
-
Precautions don't always work. ::)
Then they both have to deal with the consequences
-
"no one has ever died from want of sex"
a quote from the article. I think it is one of a few assertions made that are not backed up by evidence or strong argument. The reporter is pretty transparently biased, which is a shame as this is a complex and interesting case. Its also a shame that it involves a person who apparently has dangerous sexual interests as it skews the perception of the central question.
I don't think anone has the 'right' to sex, as it is not a solo activity. It encroaches on the personhood of another individual... or more than one if you're into that sort of thing. And those bloody InCel idiots are just so creepy. On the other hand a lack of intimacy is known to be a cause of low self esteem, depression and, therefore, a contributing factor in suicide... isn't it? If we recognise an individual's mental state as something to be taken seriously, then that must also include sexual desire. Whether or not the majority of disabled persons seeking help to have sex are male is immaterial, unless we are saying that male sexuality should not be taken seriously?
There is no easy answer to this. I feel very uncomfortable about a carer acting on behalf of client to procure paid sex. But it doesn't seem right to me to deal with the question in dismissive or olbique terms. If we accept it is ok for a independently functional adult to pay for sex, why is it ethically wrong to ahve an agent act on behlaf of a third party? I dunno... I can't be arsed to think about it any more. I only came here to distract myself from a very tedious planning meeting.
-
"no one has ever died from want of sex"
a quote from the article. I think it is one of a few assertions made that are not backed up by evidence or strong argument. The reporter is pretty transparently biased, which is a shame as this is a complex and interesting case. Its also a shame that it involves a person who apparently has dangerous sexual interests as it skews the perception of the central question.
I don't think anone has the 'right' to sex, as it is not a solo activity. It encroaches on the personhood of another individual... or more than one if you're into that sort of thing. And those bloody InCel idiots are just so creepy. On the other hand a lack of intimacy is known to be a cause of low self esteem, depression and, therefore, a contributing factor in suicide... isn't it? If we recognise an individual's mental state as something to be taken seriously, then that must also include sexual desire. Whether or not the majority of disabled persons seeking help to have sex are male is immaterial, unless we are saying that male sexuality should not be taken seriously?
There is no easy answer to this. I feel very uncomfortable about a carer acting on behalf of client to procure paid sex. But it doesn't seem right to me to deal with the question in dismissive or olbique terms. If we accept it is ok for a independently functional adult to pay for sex, why is it ethically wrong to ahve an agent act on behlaf of a third party? I dunno... I can't be arsed to think about it any more. I only came here to distract myself from a very tedious planning meeting.
Yeah, because the exploitation of women is just a good distraction from a planning meeting.
Far from your best post.
-
I see. I’m more than happy not to trouble you again with my participation