Discussion about this post

User's avatar
CC's avatar

The utilitarian cannot say animals having sex with each other is fine even most of the time if wild animal suffering is a thing for that species (and it is for most species). Also, the consent theorist might be able escape the problem by appealing to agency. It’s wrong for (most) humans to have sex with an animal because we know better; we know it violates consent, and we would be the perpetrators of that wrong. Animals aren’t moral agents, so it isn’t even clear that they’re doing something wrong (violating consent) when they have sex. For very young children who aren’t yet moral agents, letting them have sex with each other might have negative consequences for them in the future, which is why it’s good to intervene on their behalf.

Expand full comment
Bob Jacobs's avatar

What about power dynamics as an explanation? Two 14 year-olds can consent to each other because there is no asymmetric power dynamic whereas this wouldn’t hold with a 14 year old and a 30 year old.

Similarly, if a human wants to have sex with a sheep the power dynamics are extremely one sided, but two sheep or humans not.

(This viewpoint would imply that if we encounter a relationship between a human and a creature who is much stronger and smarter than a human (e.g Smaug) we should also not consider this ethical of Smaug)

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts