Analysis Of Romeo And Juliet's Cycle Of Sexual Perversion

686 Words2 Pages

Thomas Nagel’s (birth and death date) article on Sexual Perversion questions the ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ sexual behaviours and boundaries of it. Natural and unnatural sexual behaviours are dependent on the society, culture, and time. Something natural in one’s society and culture might change with respect to time. Nagel explains the ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ behaviours by using “sceptical argument” of appetite, just as appetite can be satisfied in a number of ways can sexual desire. Hunger is interaction with the food to satisfy one’s needs; however, with sexual desire one needs to interact with other person who is dependent on reactions and impulses person by oneself and the other person. Sexual desire may change, people may desire different …show more content…

Nagel uses Romeo and Juliet to explain the cycle of sexual perversion. Nagel’s Romeo and Juliet are at an opposite end of a cocktail lounge in a room with many mirrors. Romeo notices Juliet sipping her cocktail in the mirror; however, Juliet is not aware that Romeo is noticing her. Romeo is aroused sexually, an unaroused object arouses however, i.e. Romeo’s the sexual perversion is broken, as Juliet is not sensing Romeo. However, if the Juliet senses Romeo in the other mirror and neither of them knows that the other is noticing them, Juliet becomes aroused as well. When Romeo realizes that Juliet is noticing him, he may be aroused more. Sexual arousal may begin with a person sensing the other, the other sensing the person, and then the person knowing that the other is sensing him and the other knowing his partner is sensing the person. The more the person spends their time on the perception of arousal, the more he is …show more content…

A person could debate if the eye contact between partners in heterosexual relationships is sexual perversion, as this satisfies all Nagel’s criteria on sexual perversion. One could also argue if masturbation is sexual perversion or not, some societies see masturbation as sexual perversion and others societies may not. Masturbation could be regarded by traditional or religious society as sexual perversion, as they may only have sexual pleasure with their partners, not by themselves. However, masturbation does not satisfy the Nagel’s criterion of sexual perversion as there is no partner to perceive sexual desire. Adult or child pornography could also be debatable, as it does not satisfy Nagel’s idea of sexual perversion. In some societies, pornography is regarded as sexual perversion while in others it is not. Nagel’s sexual perversions are debatable as some topics are controversial as they are based on the morals of one’s society. Adult pornography may be moral but child pornography may not be moral in one society or both may be moral or not moral in other societies. Thus Nagel’s idea of sexual perversion is ambiguous and may not applied for everything related to sex

Open Document