I had a friend ask me this question some time ago and we tried to talk through it but ended up still stumped. The story went: if there is a husband and wife in a happy marriage but the husband goes away on a business trip, maybe has a little too much to drink or just has a lapse in judgement, and has a one-night stand with another woman and knows it was a morally wrong act does he have the obligation to tell her even though it will devastate her and potentially end her marriage? Or should the husband keep quiet and live quietly with the shame he has brought on his marriage? If an immoral act has already been committed does it do any good to be truthful about it and bring further harm to others, as would happen if the wife were told? It just seems that if it is immoral to do harm to others than telling the wife might just be as immoral as the act of adultery.

Hello, I hope you bear with my question despite its Jerry Springer-like context. My boyfriend tells me he has occasional sex with other women in a way that “doesn’t change anything between us.” We’re in a long-distance relationship that is also new, and so far he has demonstrated his loyalty to me whenever another woman advances a claim on him in my presence. I find it impossible to find a rational objection to his having sex with others in such a situation because in substance, if not form, fidelity seems to be present. Yet I am bothered tremendously by his having sex with others. Though promiscuity while being in a relationship is an old and frequently arising issue, in my experience people increasingly seek to deal with it through “full disclosure” that is supposed to enable us to grant or withdraw consent to such an arrangement. The merits of such an approach are realism and honesty, and my particular situation seems to be the scenario in which consent cannot be rationally denied. So how can I make...

Dear Philosopher(s), I would like to ask what would be Wittgenstein's view about sexuality? I'm not sure whether Wittgenstein would consider sexuality philosophically interesting. Note that I'm interested in what would be strictly Wittgenstein; NOT Wittgensteinian. Thank you for your time.

Pornography is a topic often battled over. If the person is of legal age and accessing pornography by non-illegal means then what is the problem with it? Why do so many people have such outrage against it and want to close it down or belittle those who access it?

In relation to sex, when is it considered permissible to gives oneself to another? If what one is waiting for is love, then why does a piece of paper stating marriage have to stop a person from connecting himself/herself with his/her love physically and spiritually? A piece of paper will not stop a breakup. If this is all true, then why does the dilemma of if to have sex or not plague one's mind?

Despite all the modern protestations of liberalism and political correctness, I have yet to meet a straight person who is fully comfortable with the idea of homosexuality. They claim to have no problem with the lifestyle, but inevitably succumb to negative gay stereotypes or latent discomfort (people are, I find, generally more accepting of me as a lesbian, but admit that they find the idea of gay men bizarre/wrong/funny etc). The increasing number of "out" gays seems only to have had an effect on the legal system, rather than people's general morality (and I do speak generally, from personal and first-hand experience alone). Why is it that the lessening gap between percentages of gay and straight people is not accompanied by similarly decreased prejudice? Imagine that the number of gay people outnumbered the straight population (unlikely, but I maintain that all humans are essentially bisexual) - would the minority straight population still see the gay population as "abnormal" due to the fact that they...

Does a person have any moral/legal OBLIGATION to have sex with his/her partner in a relation of marriage? Thanks.

Why is bestiality such a horrendous crime in most (perhaps all) countries in the world, whereas the killing of animals for consumption, and in some cases, even as a sport (deer, pigs, sheep, cattle, etc.) is not a crime? Isn't it more cruel to animals to kill them, than to rape (if that is the right word to use here) them?

I am having an affair with a married man who is my coworker. I did not begin the affair, he pursued me. His wife does not know. I feel guilty about it but I am in love with him. He says that he loves me but that he also loves his wife because although she is abusive and he feels no attraction to her she was there for him when he was very ill two years ago. Are my actions unethical? If she doesn't know and I am truly in love with him is it okay? Are his actions more unethical than mine?

I can just about fathom how Catholics consider the early 'termination' of an embryo or a foetus murder but the birth control dictate flummoxes me. They can't seriously be suggesting that every spermatozoa exists for the sole purpose of impregnating a women and that denying them access to the uterus is a sin. This has to be a very bizarre and damaging interpretation of Biblical Scripture and not one shared by other Christian sects. Orgasms are genetically encoded to further the survival of a species. The fun element is a plus but reproduction is not the be all and end all - monkeys and people would not masturbate otherwise. And wouldn't involuntary nocturnal emissions by male Catholic celibates suggest this is just a natural thing, independent of religious strictures? Is there any justification for such a belief beyond the Bible and is such a belief at all tenable in philosophical terms?