Liberal Sexual Ethics: Presenting The Self Ownership Argument

I believe the self-ownership argument for liberal sexual ethics is incorrect and I will prove it in this essay. The fourth premise that if adults may do with their own bodies whatever they see fit, provided that what they do does not violate the rights of others, then consent between all parties involved is enough for sex between adults to be permissible, provided that by having sex with one another they do not violate the rights of others has flaws to it.

The Objection to the Premise

To begin, hundreds of years ago, slavery was legal and common in America. African American slaves did not own their own bodies, or if in some sense they did, they were not free to do what they wanted with their own bodies. Each individual belonged to their owners and they had extremely limited control over their bodies. In fact, according to the Cambridge Dictionary, the definition of slave is, “a person who is legally owned by someone else and has no personal freedom”. Granted, slavery has been banned in America thanks to the thirteenth amendment, but regardless, that specific premise would not have been valid in the United States until 1865. Also, slavery is still common in other countries.

Second, what exactly defines an adult? Why do children not have the right to own their own bodies? And if you are not an adult, then who owns you until you become one? According to the trusty internet, adulthood is reached based off of several different conditions. Some say 18 years old is the considered the age of adulthood because it is the legal voting age and suffrage is tied to adulthood all across America. Others say the male age of adulthood is around 26 years of age while the female age of adulthood is around 23, which is simply based off of a survey completed by the New York Post, asking at what age they felt they fully became a grownup. In my opinion, becoming of age is based off of when you personally are able to take your career, relationships, and life choices seriously. In that case, every individual may hit that point in their lives at significantly different stages, whether it be at age 16 or 30. Some are raised in households where they take on roles and responsibility at a young age, which could mean they become an adult earlier than someone who had a stable, wealthy childhood and had zero responsibilities until they turned 18 and went away for college. Childhood ends when adulthood begins.

Lastly, self-ownership accounts to unfiltered rights to one’s life, but according to Murray Rothbard, if others do not own you and you do not own you, then no one owns you. If no one owns you then there is no one to give consent for you, nor can anyone do what they want to your body, because it is no one’s body to control. Actions like suicide are not even an option because you would be causing harm and damage to property you do not own. Since no one else owns you and you do not own you, there is a lack of ownership over your body which leads to a lack of rights over your body. Therefore, you do not have the right of use over your own body, nor does anyone else, even in the sense of consent between adults being permissible for sex.

The Response to the Objection

Contrary to the above objections to the premise of the self-ownership argument of liberal sexual ethics, adults are capable of owning their own bodies. Legally, an adult is at least 18 years of age. Once an individual turns the age of 18, they can become independent individuals. They are able to vote, join the military, work full time, play the lottery, change their birth name, get married, adopt a pet or a child, purchase a house and a vehicle, and most relevantly, give consent, but some 18 year old’s may not have fully developed mental capacities, especially because science leads us to think our brains are not fully developed until the age of 25, making them incapable of being labeled as an adult.

As an adult, logically and based off of the government’s principles, if individuals are legally allowed to purchase and own a house and give consent, they are allowed to own their own bodies. Being able to give consent implies that you have control and ownership to your own body. If you were not allowed to give consent as an adult, then you would not have ownership of your own body because you would not be able to control what happens to your own body or who does what to your own body. Based off of the self-ownership argument for liberal sexual ethics, without owning your own body, you cannot give consent. Therefore, the premise is sound.

The Reply to the Response

Just because consent is legally allowed to be given at the adult age of 18 does not mean that adults own their own bodies. As sad as it is, realistically, requiring consent does not stop people every time. According to Rainn.org, every 73 seconds an American is raped. Within those victims, on average 15 percent are between the ages of 12 and 17. All of those ages are under the legal age of consent and becoming an adult- 18. Since they are under the age of 18 and they are not legally an adult, they do not own their bodies. Their violator becomes the new owner of their body, even if they are over the age of being a legal adult. Even if you are an adult who owns your own body, consent is not enough because consent can be taken from you and consent, or lack thereof, can be ignored. Plus, consent cannot be given while under the influence, nor can it be given if it is coerced or if it is given by someone who is incapacitated. Perhaps “does not violate the rights of others” needs to be replaced with “does not violate the rights of others, causes no harm, and does not degrade any of those involved'. Then, and only then would the premise if adults may do with their own bodies whatever they see fit, provided that what they do does not violate the rights of others, then consent between all parties involved is enough for sex between adults to be permissible, provided that by having sex with one another they do not violate the rights of others of the self-ownership argument of liberal sexual ethics be permissible. 

Conclusion

In conclusion, sexual ethics is a complex and multifaceted subject that delves into the moral principles and values that guide human behavior in intimate relationships and sexual interactions. It is evident that sexual ethics play a crucial role in shaping societal norms and expectations surrounding sexuality, consent, and respect for one another's autonomy. The code of response to sexual ethics is intertwined with promoting healthy relationships, emphasizing open communication, and ensuring consent is freely given in all interactions.

References

1. Finnis, J. (1984). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford University Press.

2. Grisez, G., Boyle, J., & Finnis, J. (1987). Practical Principles, Moral Truth, and Ultimate Ends. American Journal of Jurisprudence, 32(2), 99-151.

3. MacIntyre, A. (1984). After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. University of Notre Dame Press.

4. Foot, P. (1978). Virtues and Vices. Basil Blackwell.

5. Nussbaum, M. (1999). Sex and Social Justice. Oxford University Press.

6. Scruton, R. (2000). Sexual Desire: A Philosophical Investigation. Phoenix.

7. Russell, B. (1929). Marriage and Morals. Liveright.

8. Kant, I. (1785). Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. Hackett Publishing.

   Keep in mind:
   This is only a sample.

   Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.

   Get custom essay

9. Singer, P. (1979). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.