sexual ethic

What is acceptable sexual ethic between consenting adults?

The consequences of sexual activities of our community have been a problem for centuries, if not original sin.  To spell out what is acceptable creates a problem as who is wise enough to lay judgement and condemn deviants to the dungeons, outcast the abnormal to the nights where the devils come out to play.  To define 'sexual' is not an easy task, for is it just penetration or does oral count; petting and hand holding, courting, masturbating and forget not the psychic wave penetration.  Is it wrong to act upon a desire because of what the lay would think of us.  Is it wrong to think of a sexual act because we fear the wizards and witches of Oz.  The term 'consenting adult' needs serious analysis as the majority of the community have the brain capacity of infancy.  If we were to accept authority, whose would it be; for one say it is fine to fornicate as need be, while another joice at adultery and bigamy, marriage being for the idiocy.  The choice of the love object creates dilemmas as the norm, customs of a time and place define right and wrong.  Economies and culture play its' part, placing its' price on the divine activity.  Abstinence may be the only way out.  To get the dipstick wet is common sense where I live, right or wrong; I still ponder.

Marriage seems to be the acceptable institution for sexual practice amongst consenting adults in most societies of present time, but what of fornication, adultery and the practice of bigamy.  As people cross borders, encounter different races, species and cultures, our concept of right and wrong may be questioned.  Most accept the way of authority as right.  It may be their mentors, their parents, siblings or teachers.  The leaders, holy some may claim, preach their script as the word of the Lord.  The problem of accepting divine instruction is the credibility.  How are we to know that the Lord spoke to Moses, Mohammed and Jesus alone.  Why does he not instruct everyone of us?  Then arises the problem of noble perjury as one might act, instruct sly for personal gain, for the greater good.  To procreate is the need for human civilization, the simple sexual act of the primitive beast takes just a few minutes.  For the child, let marriage be, seems to be the general consensus, Plato disagreed.  It may seem wrong to marry one who is not compatible, the dating game, the fornication may seem wise, allowed to see if the couple may pass the tests, the trials and tribulations.  However, our great psychologists may agree that many problems do arise from an early intimacy.  Sexual contact before the mind can handle the pains to ensue, may lead to psychotic episodes; the mortido, the destructive force, the aggressive impulse will gain on the libido, the creative force, the sexual impulse.  Indulging on the sexual impulse lead not only to homicidal tendencies, but also suicidal tendencies.  Feelings of loss, financial, sexual, emotional, self esteem and social respect, bring one down the hierarchy of needs.  Maybe it is bad luck to see the bride before the wedding.  But who to choose a compatible mate.  A lifetime of servitude to one we love not.  Is there sexual pleasure in a marriage of convenience, or only contempt for being a prisoner of the structure of society; one has to marry to be prim and proper, bear child at the right age and serve the sexual master as need be.  To adulterate may be sin, but what of the sexual desire.  Once married, bitterness seems to prevail as there are trials and tribulations that lead to aggressive dialogue, maybe even violent tendencies.  Sex after sour episodes can only be in contempt.  As divorce seems to generate fickle gossip, children may be in the way, and financial security may be a consideration to endure the sexual molestation.  With all the contempt some may face in a contemptuous, bitter marital relationship, it may not seem so evil to seek some love elsewhere.  If the evidence of centuries have proved misery from a single sexual partner, bigamy may seem wiser.  As we fornicate with multiple partners, why can one not marry multiple partners.  If there is enough libido and finances to manage a harem, who is wise enough to judge the actions of the lover.  If the lover is able to cater to all the needs of the concubines, mistress upon mistress, treat every like a queen, have them craving for more, is it really a wrong?  It is so difficult to know right form wrong, it may be wiser to accept, and debate in an orderly fashion, the ways of the lawmakers as they seem to know what is good for the wider nation.

The choice of object to love is also of great concern as there does not seem to be any apparent right or wrong.  Most of society follow the norm as it is within their community, whether it be geographically, religiously, racially or class defined.  In the past, prior to globalism, prior to the digital and industrial revolution, it would have been acceptable to live in the dogmatic fashion that has prevailed, however it is difficult to define what is right and wrong when the object of love is sought in the evolution through time.  One might decide that opposites attract; a black man might seek the love of a white woman, God forbid.  The sin.  The lower class to have their way with one of ours.  What would people say?  Is it wrong?  People do not allow their children to marry anyone out of their religious church, as in the caste system prevalent in India, which is no more than the class system evident over the world.  Personally, I think it is a matter of compatibility.  Do the lovers share common interests?  Are they able to hold a conversation together?  Do they make each other laugh?  Do they pine for each other?  Divine authority does not explicitly condemn inter-racial, inter-class, geographically distant or cross faith partner choices.  It is family, friends and the community who cause feelings of emotional insecurity as they meddle, stare and point jester at the abnormal.  The gays have the real battle, as the old testament forbids homosexual activity and most countries even criminalize homosexual relations.  Is it wrong?  Who are the gays hurting from the sexual preference?  I say let them do as they please!  Then we have to deal with the perverted youngster who seduces mature women into his harem.  The cheek of the devil to use his tongue!  It is wrong I say!  Any womanizer to lure spinsters, widows, divorcees and married women all the same, grand or great, into his lair should be thrown into the dungeons, hung if need be.  Then there's the chronic masturbators who indulge in sexual fantasy.  It never ends.  Wretched sinners everywhere; what are we to do?  From the internet to the psychi dimension, there are masturbators a plenty.  In all seriousness, tolerance is the key;  As the space age has dawned upon us, there is no doubt, we will encounter all forms of intelligent species.  They will have their ways and we will have to learn to cohabit, maybe even indulge in sexual pleasures and procreate together.  Who will be the judge and jury for a better tomorrow I ask?

Prostitution, the oldest profession, brings upon nothing but misery for all woman kind.  As most women are not geared to hunt or fish, unequipped with skills to generate money in a capitalistic modern world, they are left with nothing more than their body to capitalize on.  I believe sincerely that it is wrong.  What can be done about it; nothing!!  Most governments don't provide the education, training and employment opportunities for women.  Welfare countries are scarce and those that do provide welfare, do it unwillingly, the sustenance being unattractively minimum.  Prostitution is purely a result of the economic structure of the world.  We are upon the space age, ready to meet new species, yet we demean our women.  Women do not have sex for the love of it.  It is purely for the need of money!!  It is wrong!!  However, there is no authority to stop it, only tax it.  If the women were given the opportunity to enter the workforce and earn a respectable wage, would she still perform oral gratifications on a regular basis?  I think not.  Money is the root of all evil!!  Turn the tables; the cheeky gigolo who lusts for every woman he lay his eyes upon, charge not to go down on every opportunity, massage the juices out, pleasure every sense thinkable, multiple orgasms, hours on end, hoards of ladies queueing at his door, the satisfied client his only pay!  It would be so wrong to charge a penny for the thought that brought the cheeky grin on the horny devils.  Shame upon the ladies to desire a tickle of their fancy.  Women are to serve mankind.  Who have ever heard of juicing woman kind.  That is what lube is for.  The desire is penetration, not clitoral stimulation.  Foreplay?  That is not in the dictionary of normal mankind.  Woman was created for the pleasure of man, not the other way around.  It is acceptable to rape womankind.  Prisoner of a brothel to serve the many or prisoner of marriage to serve the one, prostitution of womankind is the acceptable norm of every society in present day.

Abstinence, the way of the holy, may be the best choice.  Desire brings suffering, as professed by the great Buddha.  The works of Freud point the finger at the sexual impulse, the root causation for all neuroses.  Research would show that the west who indulge in fornication and adultery have the highest divorce rates, over fifty percent of all marriages.  The sexual incompetent couple are not the only ones to suffer; there are the children, extended families, friends, the workplace and estranged lovers.  Those that don't get divorced, remain in unhappy marriages due to economic factors or considerations of the children.  Then there's the pains of the death of the loved object.  The few who really possess a loving sexual and companionate relationship have to deal with the fact that their love will eventually fall sick, grow frail and die.  The suffering of the sexual desire is inevitable.  And what of the East?  A forced arranged marriage?  Absolutely no sexual desire, just an act to play the part of the norm, marry at an appropriate age, procreate and rear children, the purpose of mankind.  There was no desire, so it couldn't possibly end is suffering, could it?

Defining right and wrong is the most difficult task in the world.  There are so many issues to be considered.  The dilemma of the morality of the sexual act itself and the consequences upon the individual and the greater society are of greater concern.  Aristotle reasoned that virtue would bring about happiness, however the satisfaction of the pleasure principle via sexual gratifications seem to be more vice than virtue, frowned upon by most of society.  According to Freud, sexual activities are the root cause for all neuroses, the fall of civilization.  Holy scriptures have been disregarded as nonsensical, however it may seem that the Divine instructions had reason.  The care ethic would prescribe against fornication, adultery, bigamy and prostitution as they are detrimental to the individuals’ mental health and have negative implications to the rest of society.  Most of society are feeble minded and are as a result unable to reason with the complexities of making ethical decisions concerned with sexual conduct.  We have no choice but to submit our sovereignty to the educated to make reason for the lay.