Sexual Ethics

[zekko]

I was listening to a discussion on sexual ethics. I can't really say I agreed with much of what was said, but it made me think.
Does anyone here have any sexual ethics? Any sense of right or wrong when it comes to sex? What is the philosophical base of that position? Are there limits to what you would or would not do?

I know a lot of PUA material promotes the idea that morality simply doesn't exist, so I'm curious what people think here.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Consensual and no violence.

 

[forcerecon01]

Don't commit incest . No underage sex. No child pornography. No acts with animals. No weird stuff like domination role playing etc.

 

[zekko]

Don't commit incest . No underage sex.

Incest obviously seems yucky. But if you think about why incest is wrong, it goes directly back to sex as a means of procreation. Because sex between family members can result in deformities of the resulting child.

The person I was listening to was arguing that the natural reason for sex was procreation, or for unifying the parents to keep them together and helping to raise the child. Anything outside of that was "misusing" sex, and was therefore ethically wrong. I don't think I could logically defend that position. Still, it makes me think about the "natural" purpose of sex.

What would you consider underage? Is it unethical for two 16 year olds to experiment? There certainly is an element of risk involved.

 

[Serenity]

Is it unethical for two 16 year olds to experiment?

Nope, but the general rules still apply, consent. I lost my virginity at 16 to a girl my age, also perfectly legal where I'm from. In fact it's not strictly illegal here if one person is 17 and the other 15, even though the age of consent is technically 16. People under 15 can't be prosecuted here, so two 13 year olds could experiment without any legal repercussions. Whether it's unethical or not? I'd say it would come down to the individual case, as long as they're both cool with it and about the same age I don't see the problem.

As for other sexual ethics I think it's wrong to use any form of deception. I wouldn't make a woman think I'm interested in relationship if I'm not, just to fvck her. If I'm in a relationship I would rather break up than cheat. I will not pressure anyone into having sex with me, if they don't want to I'd rather find someone who does. The "philosophical base" would simply be to inflict as little unnecessary pain as possible, I care about more than myself.

As for silly ethics about specific sex acts I'm open minded. Someone mentioned domination role playing, that has nothing to do with ethics or morality. None of it is wrong if it's consensual and both parties enjoy it, simple as that.

Following the idea that morality doesn't exist is dangerous. Anyone who fully believes that are lacking empathy, either because they don't know what harm they're causing or they don't care. The latter being worse since it's intentional rather than a result of ignorance.

 

[zekko]

Following the idea that morality doesn't exist is dangerous. Anyone who fully believes that are lacking empathy

Good point. I bet if you asked most people who dismiss the idea of morality if it was okay to murder someone, they would say no.
And if they didn't, well a lot of PUA Theory uses psychopaths and the dark triad for role models.

 

[metalwater]

As with all things, Integrity. I can perceive that the posters that brag about taking married women (who are willing..) are generally sounding less happy then the men who refuse to do that. The ones that tell they don't do that appear to give better and more real and thoughtful advice. One person I believe even said they just wait for the girl to dump the fool, and then its all good and no drama. This self enforced policy sounds like part of the foundation of a real Man.

 

[forcerecon01]

Incest obviously seems yucky. But if you think about why incest is wrong, it goes directly back to sex as a means of procreation. Because sex between family members can result in deformities of the resulting child.

The person I was listening to was arguing that the natural reason for sex was procreation, or for unifying the parents to keep them together and helping to raise the child. Anything outside of that was "misusing" sex, and was therefore ethically wrong. I don't think I could logically defend that position. Still, it makes me think about the "natural" purpose of sex.

What would you consider underage? Is it unethical for two 16 year olds to experiment? There certainly is an element of risk involved.

Yes it is unethical for two 16 year olds to have sex. The reason is the female has not fully developed yet and if she gets pregnant she could die.

 

[Black Widow Void]

I've never mislead or promised a gal any type of future or commitment - if I felt otherwise.
I have, however said ... "I'm not interested in anything serious" beforehand as white-lie (when in reality, I didn't see them as anything more than a lay).

I also do not date or sleep with ex's of my friends (once a pal is married, that code is no longer valid).

On my dark side...

I've done quite a few grudge-phucks in my lifetime.
Also, when an ex has pushed my buttons, I've been known to sleep with her friends whenever possible. I never have to worry about saying a word, because things like that always get back to them in time.

 

[MrWood]

Yes it is unethical for two 16 year olds to have sex. The reason is the female has not fully developed yet and if she gets pregnant she could die.

actually 14-17 is the target age for babies, biologically

 

[Serenity]

Yes it is unethical for two 16 year olds to have sex. The reason is the female has not fully developed yet and if she gets pregnant she could die.

Mature women can also die, but you would be correct to say teenage pregnancies are at a higher risk. We're talking about sex though, that doesn't necessarily have to include reproduction. I find nothing wrong with it as long as they practice sex safely. Good sexual education at an early enough stage is extremely important.

We can't prevent them from exploring sex anyways and I consider doing so to be a greater evil than teaching then how to do it responsibly.

actually 14-17 is the target age for babies, biologically

Women in that age group are at higher risk of complications. If your consideration is "greatest chance of successfully producing offspring", then you are wrong. The optimal age range is 20-30.

 

[forcerecon01]

Mature women can also die, but you would be correct to say teenage pregnancies are at a higher risk. We're talking about sex though, that doesn't necessarily have to include reproduction. I find nothing wrong with it as long as they practice sex safely. Good sexual education at an early enough stage is extremely important.

We can't prevent them from exploring sex anyways and I consider doing so to be a greater evil than teaching then how to do it responsibly.


Women in that age group are at higher risk of complications. If your consideration is "greatest chance of successfully producing offspring", then you are wrong. The optimal age range is 20-30.

True

 

[Spaz]

actually 14-17 is the target age for babies, biologically

In the past this was considered the best age, people back then followed natural biology via experience.

Nowadays, morality and perhaps economics comes into play, so the age is increased.

Maybe one day in the future, when scientists has come up with a way to lessen retardation in babies, they'll push the age to 30-40 and say anything less will cause serious damages to women.