Erotic passion is not considered a prerequisite for moral sexuality for the traditionalist. After all, erotic disconnect would naturally be a component of many traditional marriages. A traditional marriage is not necessarily one that was entered into out of mutual sexual interest or passion. Even when the relationship does begin with sexual passion, that passion can fade as the couple grows emotionally distant. If sex can only take place within the institution of marriage, erotic disconnect is possible but not morally reprehensible by any means. For the traditionalist, the institution of marriage trumps sexual pleasure. Moreover, if sex can involve no toys, no sex play, and no use of "organs for purposes not intended by God/Nature" then many individuals would experience erotic disconnect in their marriages. Because the traditionalist also mandates heterosexuality, any homoerotic...

On the one hand, the sex is objectively moderate. Without passion, there are few sexual extremes to consider. On the other hand, erotic disconnect suggests the lack of long-term happiness and fulfillment. This would be contrary to Aristotle's good, moral life.
Kant and Nagel would likewise find erotic disconnect morally wrong. The essence of a sexual relationship is mutuality, reciprocity, and interpersonal intimacy. These features are lacking from a relationship in which one or both of the individuals is not fully present in the moment. Moreover, fantasizing about someone else while having sex is an act of deception. Kant specifically argues against deception. Sex with deception is immoral.