Abortion, Application Essay Example

Introduction

Associated with the issue of abortion is the viewpoint that the only proper context for sex, given its nature, is as part of a committed personal relation. To begin, if sexual relations are conducted only within the context of committed relationship, there is less likelihood of abortion because the men and women involved are more inclined to enduring relationships, which would more easily accommodate the raising of children. Then, there can be no reasonable refuting that sex takes on greater meaning when those involved feel deeply for one another, no matter any other perspective taken on sex. To assert, however, that the committed relationship is the only proper context for sex is to deny aspects of humanity and biology as old as humanity itself. Equally importantly, “proper” is an extraordinarily subjective term, and this alone renders the statement invalid as an absolute claim. The greater reality, as will be examined, is that sex is a natural function which is ethically and culturally valid in a variety of forms, certainly beyond that of the committed relationship.

Discussion

In order to rationally refute the statement initially made, it is necessary to first comprehend just how sex itself is generally perceived. This is critical because the statement itself indicates a view of sex that is both common and extremely narrow in scope. It relies, in fact, on sex as being seen as an activity engaged in only for pleasure and/or procreation, an assessment permitted by the statement’s reference to its “nature.” That nature, however, is only so limited when human beings constrain it to be. Sex may be a purely physical act conducted to give pleasure, but one exercise of the function by no means constrains the array of other motivations of it. This in turn goes to that aspect of its “proper context.” More exactly, if it is reasonable to claim that sex is more ethical when the commitment of a relationship elevates the physicality, it is equally reasonable to assert that sex itself is a significantly influential factor in the creation of the committed relationship. To perceive sex as a “result” or reward is to ignore its communicative essence, and relationships are frequently enhanced, and even forged, when the sexual communication between the partners expresses the mutual caring necessary to make a relationship. Sex is an expressive act (Leininger 57); adults learn on all levels through what they express, and what is expressed to them and understood by them; so sex may as easily be an essential element in the building of a relationship as it may be an aspect of a fully committed relationship. Sex seen in this light has more than one “proper” context, in that it is equally “proper” as a communication tool between those seeking to create a relationship. Consequently, the dictate of the committed relationship is inapplicable.

With regard to that persistent and troubling element of the “proper context,” it is immediately tempting to refer to how different cultures and different epochs have variously defined what is proper. The impulse to so respond is valid; in no uncertain terms, sex is and has been perceived in ways ranging from sacred to utterly unimportant, depending on the time and the society. In the England and United States of the last century, the pervasive cultural view remains that sex is more correct when occurring only in marriage or the committed relationship, even as that qualification indicates latitude of the “proper”; in Thailand, there is little societal interest on the sexual conduct of anyone, provided they maintain social roles (Nanda, Warms 217). To assert that there is an absolute standard of the “proper” here then must be assessed in terms of modern, Western thinking, for the statement clearly expressed Westernized cultural values of relatively recent history. Even in this arena, however, there is a clear issue in defining sex as belonging only within the committed relationship. Cultural and social values, as well as gender roles, have changed over the years, but there remains a dominant ideology actually endorsing masculine engagement in sex outside of relationships. In plain terms, it has long been an accepted Western tradition that a boy’s first sexual experience is a rite of passage, or even a conquest of sorts. This is in place with no expectation of the sex as belonging to a committed relationship, a dubious element itself in adolescent life. Shifts in values notwithstanding, the culture attaches importance to men as experiencing sex for no reason beyond the experience; there are no social repercussions except those of cultural approval (Chrisler, McCreary 484). As cultural approval must certainly be seen as indicating accepted morality standards, then the non-relationship sex is “proper.” The same variation applies today, at least to an extent, to women. As Western thinking moves toward less confined gender roles, women are more socially encouraged to engage in sex for its own sake. Here again, then, the component of propriety expands beyond the realm of the committed relationship.

Another consideration requires examination in regard to sex as being acceptable outside the confines of relationships, committed or otherwise. It is reasonable to assume that prostitution has existed nearly as long as has human sexuality. It certainly exists today, and within multitudes of cultures, including the Western. This is important because the commercial aspect of sex implies a cultural sanction, and this is true even in those societies that criminalize the practice. More exactly, and somewhat surprisingly, prostitution thrives in the most patriarchal societies; if it affords women a means of earning money, it nonetheless reinforces ideologies of male superiority and the society’s need to cater to male desires. Prostitution, in fact, is most prevalent in those cultures which most prize female virginity (McAnulty, Burnette 304). There is then much room for debate as to how legalized prostitution further victimizes or empowers women, just as all prostitution seems to reflect some form of gender inequality. What is of concern here, however, is that the activity flourishes, which inevitably points to sex as a commercial venture removed from societal judgment. No matter how a culture views the practice, the mere fact that it is carried on globally indicates how men – and women – value sex that has nothing to do with caring or relationships. To assert that this is an “improper” context is to ignore a fundamental reality of the human condition. Sex is a biological imperative, people typically derive pleasure from it, so assessing prostitution as improper is inapplicable. More to the point, when the sex exists only within the confines of commercial transactions, it is completely independent of such thinking, and consequently as “proper” as any other type of service.

It may be argued that the reasoning presented above disregards a vital factor, in that so clinically assessing any human conduct apart from ideas of what is right is a self-defeating aim. If young men are socially encouraged to engage in casual sex, and if prostitution is carried on widely, these are practices that degrade humans by degrading sex; the existence of what is wrong may not validate its being. It must be remembered, however, that, as noted, there are no absolutes in the realm of the cultural distinctions that define propriety, beyond perhaps those going to violent crime. If sex outside of committed relationships degrades, it is only because it is perceived as doing so; the sex is, in a word, the same function in all arenas. More importantly, to confine sex as proper only within the committed relationship is to deny men and women an immensely valuable instrument in the making of relationships: namely, the degrees of caring and knowledge for and of each that develop through the sexual intimacy.

Conclusion

That sexual conduct is troubling to a culture is hardly new, and hardly restricted to the West. Men and women perpetually seek to accommodate strong urges to the framework of their societies, even as they themselves create the frameworks. In Western culture, there remains a strong ideology endorsing sex as ideal when practiced between caring people in a meaningful relationship. The ideal, however, is only that, and sex may be fully correct, socially and otherwise, in other forms. It is identified as such in terms of social encouragement of male experimentation, as it is in the more pragmatic terrain of prostitution. It is also nearer to the ideal, yet still external to it, as a means of expression going to the creation of a relationship. Ultimately, it must be accepted that sex is a biological function, ethically and culturally correct in a variety of forms beyond that of the committed relationship.

Works Cited

Chrisler, J. C., & McCreary, D. R. Handbook of Gender Research in Psychology, Volume 1. New York: Springer, 2010. Print.

Leininger, M. M. Caring: An Essential Human Need : Proceedings of the Three National Caring Conferences. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989. Print.

McAnulty, R. D., & Burnette, M. M. Sex and Sexuality, Volume I. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006. Print.