Abstract
This paper examines the tension between the distinctive gravity of sexual coercion and a progressive sexual ethics that permits casual and promiscuous sex. Through a discussion of Fiona Woollard, Berit Brogaard, and Adri & agrave; Moret, I argue that leading attempts to explain the special wrongness of sexual coercion tend to move beyond a flatly permissive view of sex and toward a normatively loaded conception of the sexual domain. I then develop an alternative account that understands sexual coercion as the corruption of an ideal, and identifies that ideal with the unitive character of sex. Although this view introduces a hierarchy of sexual practices, it does not entail a conservative rejection of casual sex. Rather, it yields a more layered sexual ethics, one that distinguishes permissibility from ethical excellence and makes room for ideals of intimacy, connection, and mutual regard without denying the permissibility of non-ideal sexual practices.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Ethical Theory and Moral Practice |
| DOIs | |
| State | E-pub ahead of print - Jun 2026 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- Normativity
- Promiscuity
- Sexual coercion
- Sexual ethics
- Unitive sex
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Coercion, Promiscuity, and Ideal Sex'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver