Elizabeth Anderson makes a claim that “The attempt to sell gift value on the market makes a mockery of those values.”(Anderson 188) Anderson uses this claim to object commoditized sex (prostitution). There are two premises that Anderson uses to support her claim. The first premise being the gift value of sex cannot be realized in commercial terms and the second premise being that the gift value of sex is more significant that the use value of sex itself.
To support her first premise Anderson argues that the good which is sex in this case, is realized only when each partner mutually returns the other's gift in the spirit with which it was received by giving one’s own sexuality to the gift giver, so as to acknowledge that the good is serving a higher purpose than just sexual gratification. The commoditization of sex hence seems to address the lower value of sex and not the higher and more lasting value of sex. Anderson invokes the idea of the value of sex being personal and shared to those involved. The value of sex is at two levels and are both personal as is involves the fact that those entering the act of sex recognize that they are sexually attracted to each other and establishing an intimate relationship in their mutual offering of themselves to each other. This establishment of an intimate relationship implies a connection between the two as unique to them. The value is also shared as the same “good” is being realized for both involved in the act of sex, it is also in the virtue of the act being shared, that there is goodness of the value. Therefore the aspects of the higher value of sex can’t be realized in commercial terms as the norms that govern the goods as impersonal and individually enjoyable, but does indeed satisfy...
... middle of paper ...
...efining who we are, it is impossible to isolate ourselves while making a moral decision, as the market forces are now a part of what we are. And thus the gift value of a good can be realized in commercial terms. We may value money less than or equal to the lower “use” value of a good hence it thinking about the two values of a personal good becomes contradictory and should be viewed differently. In my opinion sex and love are closely related but not one and the same. They do share some values such as mutual attraction, trust, pleasure, enjoyment, but sex is individually realized as even people in love may not have sex and still continue being in love and people who are in love might have sex with their loved one just to satisfy their own needs while the partner would agree to sex even though he or she might not enjoy it as much, but out of love, would do it anyway.
Love can sometimes be seen as a counterintuitive and unconventional sense of life. The irony in it all is love could either be as warm as the Sunday morning sun or as cold as a New England winter when touched by the heart or the skin. As we grow up, if we believe we are cherished by the most respectful and admirable person, we give up the most vulnerable parts of ourselves: the body. However, throughout modern society, people tend to use sexual intercourse as a form of personal pleasure and gain without the obligations of emotions. Henceforth, stated in Sharon Olds’ “Sex Without Love”, premarital sex may be against God’s intentions to be pure but at the same time people love the priest more the teachings and are willing to go against the Lord
The female has the ability to swing back and forth between the “erotic decisions” (135) but without stopping at neither end, which makes the male lack in satisfaction although he is attracted to the female. The duality in the act of flirtation according to Simmel is that it is a game of endless possibilities where the “relationships between the sexes provides the prototype for countless relationships between the individual and the inter-individual life” (Simmel, Oakes 149). The difference between flirtation and prostitution is that flirtation, which happens just out of pure pleasure without any significant goal does not hurt the subject, whereas prostitution has the ability to degrade the
The application of morality begins at a young age for many people. Many children take on the morality of their parents through the daily events that influence their development. In many ways, parental sexuality means fidelity, and the ability to stay monogamous in order to properly raise a child in a complete family unit. This in turn expresses sexual fidelity as a form of morality, and without sexual fidelity, there will be painfully undesirable consequences. Along with the family unit being an influential aspect of sexuality, religion, particularly Catholicism, claim that sexual activity is solely justified by the reason of procreation. Freud also perceived sexuality as the dark and evil part of the human being, when allowed to freely express sexuality, the person i...
In this paper I will be looking at Goldman’s definition of sexual desire and discussing why it may be too broad of a definition. I will also suggest ways in which Goldman’s definition could be improved with a little specificity.
Throughout time scientists, philosophers, and laymen alike have discussed questions of the complexity of sex. These questions range from what sex is, to what is a sexual perversion, and far beyond exploring every nook and cranny of the subject. One of the authors that is well know for this type of discussion for idea of how to explain sexual desire is Alan Goldman. During his writing of “Plain Sex”, Goldman tries to define what sexual desire is, what a sexual perversion is, and other claims relating to sexual desire, often shrugging off previously believed theories. His ideas lead away from the idea that sex has a means end and leads to a more primal basis that sex is a desire for physical contact and the need to fulfill this desire for physical contact. In the end I will argue that his definition leaves out our basic cognitive functions and defines humans as to primal form of being. This leads us into his central arguments for why he sees it logically necessary that sex is a need for physical contact and the pleasure that comes from it.
In December of 2011, an article published in the New York Times swept the nation. The article featured Barbara Terry, a fifty-two year old Bronx woman, mother of four and self-proclaimed devout Christian. Barbara attended college for two years, training to become a medical lab technician before she and her husband divorced at the age of 21. Stuck alone without a complete college education and four kids, Barbara turned to working the streets of Hunts Point, a neighborhood in the Bronx. Barbara has been in the profession for 31 years and throughout all those years, she says that she has been arrested over one hundred times. Despite all these arrests, she continues to return to the streets as her primary source of income. “There’s so much money out here, you wouldn’t believe it” (Kilgannon, 2011). Barbara has earned enough income via prostitution to put two children through college and buy a house in upstate New York. Barbara’s experience with prostitution is indicative of the growing interest in the practice and legality of prostitution in the United States.
Sex is an important yet seemingly impolite subject in today’s society, and despite its implicit awkwardness, sex—and all of its taboos—needs to be discussed. The fact that we are so squeamish about discussing sex is ironic, since sex is a commonplace occurrence that nearly everyone, worldwide, will experience during their lifetime. Our society’s silence about sex creates a number of discrepancies in what is deemed societally and morally appropriate. One of the most important issues regarding sex is what makes it ethically permissible. Is consent enough or is there something more needed? Some philosophers argue that consent is substantial for considering if sex is moral; others disagree and claim that consent is the tip of the iceberg considering the morality of sex. I agree with the ladder; I believe that consent is important, but there needs to be equality in what each person receives from the sexual act itself, whether this be in the
Starting with modernity, we have entered an era of production of the Other. It is no longer a question of killing, of devouring or seducing the Other, of facing him, of competing with him, of loving or hating the Other. It is first of all a matter of producing the Other. The Other is no longer an object of passion but an object of production. Maybe it is because the Other, in his radical otherness [alterite], or in his irreducible singularity, has become dangerous or unbearable. And so, we have to conjure up his seduction. Or perhaps, more simply, otherness and dual relationships gradually disappear with the rise of individual values and with the destruction of the symbolic ones. In any case, otherness [alterite] is lacking and, since we cannot experience otherness as destiny, one must produce the other as difference. And this is a concern just as much for the body as it is for sex, or for social relationships. In order to escape the world as destiny, the body as destiny, sex (and the other sex) as destiny, the production of the other as difference is invented. This is what happens with sexual difference. Each sex has its own anatomical and psychological characteristics, its own desire with all the insoluble events that emerge from that, including an ideology of sex and desire, and a utopia of sexual difference based on law and nature. None of this has any meaning [sens] whatsoever in seduction where it is not a question of desire but of a play [jeu] with desire, and where it is not a question of equality between different sexes or of an alienation of one by the other since this play [jeu] implies a perfect reciprocity of each partner (not difference or alienation, but alterity/otherness [alterite] or compl...
Barry, Kathleen. The Prostitution of Sexuality: The Global Exploitation of Women. New York: New York University Press, 1996. Print.
Means-end analysis “attribute a necessary external goal or purpose to sexual activity, whether it be reproduction, the expression of love, simple communication, or interpersonal awareness” (Goldman, 268). In Stewart’s case, he emphasizes meaningful sex and showing respect, which can be classified as expressing love and interpersonal awareness from the given quote. Goldman then adds “All definitions of this type suggest false views of the relation of sex to perversion and morality by implying that sex which does not fit one of these models or fulfill one of these functions is in some way deviant or incomplete” (Goldman, 268). Goldman is implying that these particular end means cannot be justified correctly from a morality standpoint as they allude to false misconceptions of what sex should result in. These objectives of sexual activity have been synthesized by countless philosophers and figures of the Church over the course of several centuries. Thousands of years ago, before Immanuel Kant, Robert M. Stewart, and the Catholic Church etc., who was to say that junk meaningless sex is immoral? It is essentially a philosophy created, developed, and followed by humans, manipulating them into generating the stigma on junk sex that is prominent in today’s
Some ask why prostitution spreads like a wildfire through our cities and streets. This is an easy question for functionalists, prostitution flourishes because it satisfies sexual needs that are not able to be met elsewhere(Henslin 51). Prostitutes almost seem to serve as an outlet for sexually frustrated men. When a man is unable to find a partner he always holds the option of paying for sexual pleasure. A functionalist, Kingsley Davis, concluded that prostitutes provide a sexual outlet for men who: have difficulty in establishing sexual relationships, cannot find long-term partners, have a broken relationship, want sexual gratification that is defined as immoral, desire quick sexual gratification without attachment, are curious, and are sexually dissatisfied in marriage. From this it is shown that by meeting such needs prostitution functions as a form of social control over sexual behavior. This is beneficial because it brings men with sexual desires away from unwi...
Little do most know, but on “[a]verage [prostitution] arrest[s], court and incarceration costs amount to nearly $2,000 per arrest. Cities spend an average of 7.5 million dollars on prostitution control every year, ranging from 1 million dollars to 23 million dollars.” Prostitution is the oldest known profession. Currently in 49 countries and counting prostitution is legal. Here in America there is a stigma following the label prostitute. We would rather resort to underground markets of sex labor. Endangering health, rights, and economics. Legalizing prostitution can reduce health hazards by giving heath care, also by giving rights to those that choose prostitution as their profession. In the long term this
What would happen if prostitution were to become legal in the United States? There have been many debates of whether that prostitution should be legalized in the U.S. since some countries have allowed it. With that said, prostitution should be able to help further us in the U.S such as life improvement, economic advantage, and decrease in sexual transmitted diseases. Legalizing prostitution in this world will solve problems that it has been given throughout its time in history.
The structure of society is losing ground everyday by what some people view to be human rights. I understand the importance of having freedom to exercise our rights. Some of these rights are morally incorrect, and does not necessarily better society. If prostitution is legalized, society will continue to decay from moral structure and standard. This decline in structure will cause extreme social problems, for example, the commitment for couples to remain monogamous. The bible states, “Because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their heart. Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality, so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more”, (“Women’s Devotional Bible Eph. 4.18”). This is not about religion, but an understanding that we are created to feel emotion and desire for intimacy with limitations. These limitations are for our own safety and protection. The intimacy of a couple goes deep into mind and soul, which belongs between two people in love. Sexual acts outside of a romantic relationship are just lustful and violating. Should a person settle for anything less? I think not. Money cannot buy love just empty pleasure and a desire for more. What is the value of a person’s body? Priceless, therefore, people should not sell out for impurity.
In many cases society has tried to tell you that prostitution is bad, weather it is through movies, books, religious text and many other influential aspects of society, due to the nature of the people who they portray in the act. I believe if people were properly educated into the science of sex, having sex for money would not be considered such a bad thing. When I attended prep school, I met many other kids from Europe, and let’s sat they were a little more comfortable with their sexuality, and in a few of their countries prostitution was even legal.