RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceAs Valentine’s Day approaches, one thought is inevitably conjured among students: It is not good to be alone. And this sentiment is natural. Since Plato, philosophers have regarded love as the desire to be united with another person, to ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
tanstafs: there ain't no such thing as free sex, apparently
thanks anscombe, for once again displaying your everlasting conservativeness.
on that note: LOVE=LOVE
free sex is like free food. ever soo satisfying.
The way you describe hooking up, it sounds incredibly unappealing. Hooking up for the sake of hooking can be fun, exhilarating, liberating, satisfying, and meaningful. Who are you to judge? Many of us who do not carry the burden of guilt and shame have amazing sexual freedom that is ours to cherish, love, and experience whenever and however we choose.
Marriage is an abstract institution created by human society. By no means do I wish to do away with it. I think it serves a good purpose and can be a source of fulfillment and stability. But it's important to remember that sex is a natural process, and was never meant to occur in the context of artificial constructs, except if you believe in certain religions that say a higher being ordained it as such. So the argument that fulfilling sex can only occur with marriage fails. Fulfilling sex is the product of rational choices, which may or may not involve marriage and procreation.
I never thought I'd say this but... I miss Sherif's Anscombe articles... at least he wrote coherent sentences. In addition to presenting another nonsensical Anscombe finger-wagging argument, Pederson totally botched the English language.
Even if we accept your arguments against random hookups, you completely fail to justify your opposition to premarital sex in the context of a committed relationship.
You say that "consent [to premarital sex], moreover, is often motivated by false expectations of a true relationship or is the product of peer-pressure in a sexual culture where promiscuity is expected and even extolled."
The use of the word "often" demonstrates that your argument is not universal. One can conceive of a situation in which a two people who are not married have committed themselves to one another as if they were married. They view each other as ends, not means, and their physical relationship is an expression of the love they have for one another, not a consequence of societal pressures. Unless you can demonstrate that such a relationship is impossible, your argument fails.
Never date an Anscombe member.
DP apparently thinks that everyone who has sex on campus is either married or having a one night stand. Author needs to chill out about his own hangups. Sex does not lead to "social fragmentation and isolation" nor "emotional and psychological suffering" nor "alienation and pain" (unless you're really, really bad at it -- maybe DP can try reading the Sexpert column?). 50%+ divorce rate says marriage doesn't lead to "human flourishing" either. Let's not kid ourselves about the Kant pipe being smoked here -- this is purely religious dogma.
@Not Convinced --
I completely agree; while the Anscombe author is right to point out some of the negative aspects of the "hook-up" culture, I don't see how their argument applies to people in pre-marital relationships.
@Not Convinced --
I completely agree; while the Anscombe author is right to point out some of the negative aspects of the "hook-up" culture, I don't see how their argument applies to people in pre-marital relationships.