This essay examines the debate over whether sexual relationships should involve commitment. It opens by presenting the perspective that sex without commitment is acceptable, reviewing gender differences in sexual motivation as documented by the Kinsey studies and evolutionary psychology literature. The paper then argues the opposing position — that sex should be committal — drawing on Judeo-Christian philosophy, public health concerns about STIs and unwanted pregnancy, and sociological research linking promiscuity to juvenile delinquency. The essay concludes that committed sexual relationships better serve the social, physical, emotional, and developmental needs of individuals and society as a whole.
Relationships are complex and can be complicated by a longing for lasting commitment. For this reason, many people have opted to have sex without any type of commitment — commonly described as sex with no strings attached. Others hold the belief that sex is itself a pledge of commitment. The purpose of this discussion is to explain why sex must involve commitment, while also presenting the opposing view. The argument begins with those who favor noncommittal sex before turning to the case for commitment.
Some individuals believe that sex without commitment is acceptable and will not produce adverse effects. They contend that noncommittal sex is easier for everyone involved and averts many of the problems that arise in committed relationships. Sex without commitment has always existed in some form, but in recent years it has become a growing trend.
To understand this belief system, it is necessary to understand how its proponents define sex. For them, sex is a physical or biological act — a need that must be gratified. Many argue that most people who hold this view are men, and there is evidence to support that claim. According to What Women Want — What Men Want: Why the Sexes Still See Love and Commitment So Differently, men and women have very different sexual needs. The book documents the experience of a 24-year-old woman who recounts her sexual history with 24 men over five years. She reports that the men she dated did not want commitment and sought only sex. As the book explains:
"Joan cannot understand why men apparently do not need the same things she needs in order to enjoy sexual relations. She wants sexual intercourse to be part of a relationship that includes affection, caring, verbal intimacy, and sexual fidelity. Her partners, on the other hand, appear to enjoy intercourse for its own sake, without these accompaniments. They also enjoy having intercourse with a variety of partners and expend a great deal of effort to do so. These male desires are so foreign to her that they are incomprehensible… Traditionally, compared to men, women have desired more cuddling, verbal intimacy, expressions of affection, and foreplay and afterplay in order to enjoy sexual relations (Townsend)."
The book further explains that the Kinsey Reports suggest that males and females do have very different sex drives. According to the Kinsey data, women can go long periods with little or no sexual activity, while men experience constant sexual thoughts. Men are also described as being aroused by a broader range of stimuli — including the mere sight of a potential partner — than women typically are.
These findings suggest that men are more likely to favor sex without commitment; however, many women also choose noncommittal sex (Buss). This trend has grown as women have gained greater financial independence and social freedoms once available only to men. While financial independence is beneficial and allows women to reach their full potential, it has also contributed to changing attitudes toward sex and relationships between men and women.
A book addressing feminism and sexual philosophy argues that noncommittal sex is a form of personal freedom. It contends that sex is a form of expression that can be noncommittal when both parties so choose, and that noncommittal sex and promiscuity can be used interchangeably in this context (Defries). As one passage explains:
"Promiscuity asserts a freedom from the obligation within or without marriage to 'love, honor, and obey' and a freedom to engage in sex with any peer who agrees. These refusals to issue promissory notes for affection and support throughout an indefinite future and to issue a guarantee of sexual exclusivity are promiscuity's most significant departures from the traditional sexual norm." For many, premarital sex is necessarily noncommittal sex, since it lacks the requisite "promissory note" of sexual and emotional commitment that the traditional Judeo-Christian marriage offers (Lemoncheck)."
"Spiritual definition and social, physical, emotional harms"
"Monogamy benefits individuals, children, and society"
The purpose of this discussion was to explain why sex must involve commitment. The discussion began by presenting the opposing view — that noncommittal sex is acceptable and carries no adverse effects. It then turned to the argument that sex is a spiritual as well as physical act that is best engaged in within the context of commitment. The evidence reviewed suggests that committal sex is important because it reduces social, physical, and emotional problems. It also leaves individuals feeling more fulfilled and does not contribute to juvenile delinquency. For these reasons, and the others examined throughout this discussion, sex should involve commitment.
You’re 45% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.