Sex Lies and Consent Analysis Comparative Essay

For the topic you will introduce, it will be consent. This is number 1 on the attached form.

For number 2 you can use this as an example or change it as long as it is the same topic that relates to the text “Sex, Lies & Consent”

I am pasting a previous assignment, so it will not exactly be like this but you can use it for points and you can use some of the text to reconstruct your argument (you can use that part)

For the rest of the paper, you can just follow the directions.

Premise 1: It is morally wrong to have sex with a person without their valid consent.

Premise 2: Deceiving an individual into sex involves engaging in the act with them without their morally valid consent.

Conclusion: Deceiving someone into sex is seriously wrong.

Analysis: Sex, Lies, and Consent

The argument presented above is valid because all the premises are true and consistent with the conclusion. Although a section of the readers may disagree with the premises and conclusion of the argument, it is clear that readers that adhere to the conventional forms of morality would agree with the argument. We can assess the validity and soundness of the argument by re-examining the appropriateness of the first and the second premise, and further relating the premises to the conclusion.

In the first premise, the assertion that it is wrong to have sex with someone without his/her morally valid consent is true. Sexual intercourse should only occur between two consenting individuals. Considering that humans feel degraded and exploited when they learn that they had been engaged in non-consensual sex, the premise holds. Having sex with someone without his consent is a serious crime because it functions to lower and harm the other person’s esteem. Inducing someone in non-consensual sex is similar to other forms of sex such as rape. This premise, moreover, stresses that sex can only be morally right if there is a “morally valid consent”. Morally valid sex means that before sex, the two individuals must rightfully agree and allow the other to have sex with them. Therefore, agreements made due to the influence of drugs and alcohol are not “morally valid” because the person giving the consent is incapacitated to make right and moral decisions.

The second premise claims that deceiving someone into sex occurs when one has sex with someone without seeking his/her morally valid consent. Although the premise tends to stress “deception” as a moral crime, the main crime emphasized in the premise is the “non consensual sexual act”. In this case, deception is taken as one of the causes of non consensual sex. In essence, deception functions to facilitate and promote non consensual sex. Deceiving a person into sex places the other party in a position where he/she is limited to certain information, thus giving the consent unknowingly of the offender’s intent. Therefore, when one is deceived into sex, he/she does not have the opportunity to give morally valid consent because he/she is influenced to make the decision. For instance, when a man, say John, learns that, a woman, say, Mary, is obsessed with engineers and thus pretends to be an engineer yet he is a mere foreman, and eventually have sex with Mary, the consent given by Mary is not a morally valid one. Deception functions to vitiate consent, thus making them morally invalid.

To sum up, the conclusion that “deceiving someone into sex is seriously wrong” is true. The conclusion is deemed true not only because its premises are consistent with the conclusion but also because the statement is undeniably true. In essence, it seriously wrong to have sex, someone, without seeking his/her morally valid consent.