Module 8: Mappes, "Sexual Morality and the Concept of Using Another Person

III Coercion and Sexual Morality

-Coercion is the more difficult case. Deception function to undermine the informed character of voluntary consent (to sexual interaction), coercion either obliterates consent entirely (occurrent coercion) or undermines the voluntariness of consent (dispositional coercion). Forcible rape is the most conspicuous and brutal way of sexually using another person via coercion. Occurrent coercion for the purpose of rape objectifies the victim in the strongest sense of the term and the victim's consent is entirely bypassed. In dispositional coercion, the relevant factor is threat of harm and it undermines the voluntariness of consent by bending the victim's will and coercing consent. The three of immediate and serious bodily harm is the most brutal way of coercing consent but there are a lot of ways to threaten eg. damaging reputation. The person doesn't have to comply but a person who attempts to coerce is at moral fault.

Cases

1. supervisor makes advances which are rejected and finally makes it clear that granting of sexual favors is a condition of continued employment. 2. debtor owes creditor and agrees to pay it back in a year but becomes attracted to creditor who doesn't share her interest. She says she will return the money as long as he ahas sex with her. 3. guy has two tickets to a play and when talking to a woman who says she wants to see it he suggests she be his guest but that he expects sex from his dates. 4. woman is planning trip to Europe. she's been trying to have sex with an uninterested man who has always wanted to go to Europe but can't afford it. She proves he come all expenses paid if sex is part of the arrangement. Cases 1 and 2 involve attempts to sexually use another person but 3 and 4 don't. There is a distinction between threats and offers. Threat-if you don't do what I am proposing there will be undesirable consequences for you. Offer-if you do what I'm proposing there will be desirable consequences for you. The person making an offer is not attempting to coerce but to induce consent. -It can be heard to tell the difference so ask if the proposal will ave the effect of making a person worse off upon noncompliance (threat). For cases 5 and 6 there is a professor who wants to sleep with a student and she is trying to avoid him 5. Professor tells student that her B work will be switched to a D unless she has sex. 6. Professor tells student that her B level work will be switched to an A if she has sex. 5 is sexually using another but 5 might not be morally legitimate but it's not using someone necessarily. Since he has power over her though he could be unwittingly using her since a threat doesn't have to be verbally expressed. Many believe the possibility of sanctions for noncooperation is implicit in all sexual advances across authority lines.

Conclusion

A sexually uses B if and only if A intentionally acts in a way that violates the requirement that B's sexual interaction with A be based on B's voluntary informed consent. Clearly, deception and coercion are important mechanisms whereby sexual using takes place. But consideration of case 8 has led us to the identification of yet another mechanism. In summary then limiting attention to cases of sexual interaction with a fully competent adult partner, A can sexually use B only 1. by deceiving B or 2. by coercing B but also 3. by taking advantage of B's desperate situation.

I The Morally Significant Sense of "Using Another Person"

According to a fundamental Kantian principle it is wrong for A to use B merely as a means to achieve A's ends. In other areas of our life it is unavoidable and morally unproblematic to use others as a means to achieve our various ends but it needs to be with respect for persons to conduct their individual lives as they see fit. Using someone merely as a means whenever we undermine the voluntary or informed character of their consent to interact with us in some desired way. -A immorally uses B if and only if A intentionally acts in a way that violates the requirement that B's involvement with A's ends be based on B's voluntary informed consent. Using a person in the morally significant sense can arise in two ways: coercion and deception.

Research involving human subjects

Ample opportunity for immorally using another person. The researcher immorally uses other people only if he or she intentionally acts in a way that violates the requirement that the participation of research subjects be based on their voluntary consent. For example if participation as a research subject involves significant risks and the researcher is willing to resort to the immoral using of other people , he has two options , deception (lying about risks involved -false info or withholding relevant info) and coercion (occurrent=physical force , dispositional=threat of harm)

Biomedical ethics and patient autonomy

Every adult in sound mind has a right to determine what is done to his own body. Respect for individuals autonomy is an essential part of respect for persons so medical professionals and biomedical researchers must respect individual autonomy and respect the self-determination of the patient/subject, the individual's right to determine what shall be done with his or her body. They can't act in a way that violates the requirement of voluntary informed consent and consent of competent patients is needed for medical procedures as well as research on human subjects. Consent must be voluntary (coercion undermines individual autonomy) and informed (lying or withholding relevant information undercuts rational decision making and thereby undermines individual autonomy).

II Deception and Sexual Morality

For what follows, using is to be understood as referring only to the morally significant sense. If A desires a form of sexual interaction with B, we can say that this desired form of sexual interaction with B is A's end. And A sexually uses B if and only if A intentionally acts in a way that violates the requirement that B's sexual interaction with A be based on B's voluntary informed consent. Could be used by coercion and deception. When talking about this he is talking about sexual interactions with fully competent adult partners (not with children or mentally retarded people or anyone temporarily incompetent because of drugs or alcohol.) If one person's consent to sex is predicted on false beliefs that have been intentionally and deceptively inculcated by one's sexual partner in an effort to win the former's consent, the resulting sexual interaction involves one person sexually using another. Lying isn't the only form of deception, simply withholding information is also deception.

Thesis/Summary

Liberal approach to sexual morality, Mappes attempts to determine the conditions under which someone would be guilty of sexually using another person. On his view, the morally significant sense of "using another person" is best understood in reference reference to the notion of voluntary informed consent. Thesis: One person (A) is guilty of sexually using another person (B) if and only if A intentionally acts in a way that violates the requirement that B's sexual interaction with A be based on B's voluntary informed consent. -He emphasizes the importance of deception and coercion as mechanisms for the sexual using of another person but he also insists that such using can result from "taking advantage of someone's desperate situation"

IV The Idea of a Coercive Offer

Modifications or extensions to the overall account of sexually using another person via coercion. Case 7 a model wants to become a movie superstar. a producer is interested in her beauty and after a screen test tells her he will make her a star if she agrees to sexual involvement but she finds him repugnant and isn't attracted to him but she reluctantly agrees. He hasn't sexually used and he isn't taking away anything she was entitled to already. His actions are morally condemnable but he isn't guilty of coercing consent. But some would say it's an overwhelming inducement and is an example of a coercive offer. An offer isn't coercive merely because it is extremely enticing or seductive. The model isn't acting against her own will. -A coercive offer is a case in which the recipient of an offer is in circumstances of genuine need, and acceptance of the offer seems to present the only realistic possibility for alleviating the need. We need to distinguish between genuine needs and mere wants. The model wants to be a star but doesn't need to be one. Case 8 is an example of a coercive offer. Young widower raising three children who lives in a small town to be near family. He was laid off and can't find another job and has no unemployment benefits and his family can't help him financially. If he can't come up with money for his mortgage he will lose his house. A lady who has consistently made sexual overtures that he hasn't been interested in, knows about his difficulties and offers to make mortgage payments on a continuing basis to have sex with him. She is sexually using him but her proposal is an offer not a threat. The model had a choice but this guy didn't because his choice was severely constrained by his needs. The lady was taking advantage of his desperate situation. It wasn't a coercive offer because he was already coerced by his own need not by her offer. She isn't sexually using him via coercion but she attempts to sexually use him by taking advantage of his desperate situation.