Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46

Thread: Morality Hypothetical

  1. #1

    Default Morality Hypothetical

    The following is a hypothetical situation for which I would like your input on how you would handle.

    Hypothetical - Joe has an unusual fetish; he is turned on by wearing and then taking off a hat while in front of other people. He is not attracted to other people or the idea of sex at all. This attraction to wearing and then taking off a hat while in front of other people is his one and only manner of sexual arousal. Joe should...

    1. live it up. Taking off his hat hurts no one and causes him so much joy. He should feel unashamed of living out his ultimate fantasy of going to a department store and trying on hats while in view of the other customers even though he has no intention of buying one.

    2. be cautious. He should only take off his hat in situations that he normally would do so even if he did not have the fetish (i.e. during a prayer or the national anthem). However, Joe should not feel guilty for enjoying these natural moments to the fullest as his primary intent was not focused on sexual arousal.

    3. never take off his hat in front of someone without their consent. To do otherwise, would be to involuntarily involve someone else in your sexual fantasies against their will and is inappropriate in all circumstances. Such acts should be done only with a partner with whom you have explained your fetish and they have consented to participate.

    Please tell me which of the three options is closest to your point of view and, if you want, why you feel this is the most justified option. For the time being, please refrain from comparing or contrasting the hypothetical to your own fetish. Even though that is part of the overall purpose of my post, I want to start the discussion purely within the boundaries of this hypothetical.

  2. #2

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by cr5311 View Post
    The following is a hypothetical situation for which I would like your input on how you would handle.

    Hypothetical - Joe has an unusual fetish; he is turned on by wearing and then taking off a hat while in front of other people. He is not attracted to other people or the idea of sex at all. This attraction to wearing and then taking off a hat while in front of other people is his one and only manner of sexual arousal. Joe should...

    1. live it up. Taking off his hat hurts no one and causes him so much joy. He should feel unashamed of living out his ultimate fantasy of going to a department store and trying on hats while in view of the other customers even though he has no intention of buying one.

    2. be cautious. He should only take off his hat in situations that he normally would do so even if he did not have the fetish (i.e. during a prayer or the national anthem). However, Joe should not feel guilty for enjoying these natural moments to the fullest as his primary intent was not focused on sexual arousal.

    3. never take off his hat in front of someone without their consent. To do otherwise, would be to involuntarily involve someone else in your sexual fantasies against their will and is inappropriate in all circumstances. Such acts should be done only with a partner with whom you have explained your fetish and they have consented to participate.

    Please tell me which of the three options is closest to your point of view and, if you want, why you feel this is the most justified option. For the time being, please refrain from comparing or contrasting the hypothetical to your own fetish. Even though that is part of the overall purpose of my post, I want to start the discussion purely within the boundaries of this hypothetical.
    None of the above. As 'taking on and off his hat in front of other people', is his only form of arousal, I would say that Joe has a very deviated sex life, and should seek psychological help. The first step for Joe would be to admit that he has a problem with regards to his sexuality. Secondly, Joe should seek and see a good psychologist, and hopefully work through his problem, allowing him to have a full and natural sex life.

  3. #3

    Default

    2, as should anyone else with a fetish of doing things in public.



    Quote Originally Posted by Coodie View Post
    None of the above. As 'taking on and off his hat in front of other people', is his only form of arousal, I would say that Joe has a very deviated sex life, and should seek psychological help. The first step for Joe would be to admit that he has a problem with regards to his sexuality. Secondly, Joe should seek and see a good psychologist, and hopefully work through his problem, allowing him to have a full and natural sex life.
    Asexuals can have fetishes as well, you realize. You do not need to view sex as appealing to have a sexual fetish, and one doing so does not mean they have a problem at all. I consider myself asexual, and I have a spanking fetish. I do not have a problem with my sexuality, and participating in my fetish doesn't mean that I need to seek help for it. Where are you coming from?

  4. #4

    Default

    Coodie has a good point... it might be best to seek someone else's (professional) opinion!

    But anyway, I would argue that indulging in sexually-arousing behaviour in the company of "unwilling participants" is not something that should be deliberately sought out. If this chap went round to someone's house to watch TV with a group of friends and spent the whole evening donning and doffing his hat whilst groaning, shuddering and displaying the face of someone who is clearing "pleasuring themselves" (whether in an unconventional way or not), then it's pretty disrespectful to the present company at best, and downright offensive at worst.

    However... I'd say that if Joe can keep his excitement contained (so his inner thoughts and personal arousal cannot be detected by others) then incidental donning/doffing should be fairly innocuous as it's purpose is a pragmatic function of everyday life. Being aroused in public isn't in itself immoral -- many men would become aroused at the sight of a pretty woman. But engaging in sexual activity in public is taboo. And, since for Joe, the donning/doffing of hats could be considered sexual activity, he shouldn't really be indulging in such behaviour willy-nilly(!) with unwilling/uninformed participants.

    So... the best option would be for him to avoid wearing a hat in public at all and to find people with whom he could disclose his unusual interest and who were willing to allow him to indulge in their private company. That way, he would be able to get his jollies without manipulating anyone or making anyone feel uncomfortable.

    P.S. Who the hell wears a hat in this day and age, anyway?!

  5. #5

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by tiny View Post
    P.S. Who the hell wears a hat in this day and age, anyway?!
    I do! Fast food forces it.

  6. #6

  7. #7

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Coodie View Post
    None of the above. As 'taking on and off his hat in front of other people', is his only form of arousal, I would say that Joe has a very deviated sex life, and should seek psychological help. The first step for Joe would be to admit that he has a problem with regards to his sexuality. Secondly, Joe should seek and see a good psychologist, and hopefully work through his problem, allowing him to have a full and natural sex life.
    Thank you Coodie, I did not think about option 4 - seek psychological help. I'd have to say that, in my opinion, this would be the least healthy of the options. With option 4, I could see Joe suffering from feeling that he needs to "be fixed" and is not alright the way that he is. This would not be so bad if there was a high probability of success in changing people's sexuality. From my studies, however, I have found the opposite to be true. It is more likely that this option will only cause Coodie to feel broken and guilty for something that he has no control over.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Quote Originally Posted by tiny View Post

    So... the best option would be for him to avoid wearing a hat in public at all and to find people with whom he could disclose his unusual interest and who were willing to allow him to indulge in their private company. That way, he would be able to get his jollies without manipulating anyone or making anyone feel uncomfortable.
    Would option 2 sound more or less appealing if Joe could only be turned on if the people watching didn't know about his fetish?

  8. #8

    Default

    Hello,

    I don't think Joe should seek psychological help. Is he hurting himself or others? I don't see, why the latter would be a problem. Is he in any way hurting himself? That's something Joe should decide and only Joe. If he wants a family and can't have it, because he is fixated only at his hat, well, then he should seek psychological help. Generally, psychological help is only helpful if and when someone is or causes suffering.

    I think (1) is a good idea. And he should seek a group of people with a similar desire, so that he as a safe space (akin to the bedroom for others). I do think there is strong argument for (1). I think there is only one criterium why you shouldn't live your sexual desires in the public. People are there just by chance and they have a right of not having to notice you. Is he drawing any special attention to himself? I know a lot of people who regulary try on clothes, even though they might not buy them. If people would recognise him in the hat store, he would only be seen as an odd hat shopper. The only problem I see would be if he would go always to the same store, since they're living off having paying customers.

    His desire is specifally to wear a hat while in front of other people. His behaviour and intention doesn't change, because he is only doing it when people are expecting him to (as in 2), he is still involving them into something they didn't agree to participate in. There is no substantial difference between (1) and (2).

    But other people don't need an explanation, they might just think he likes showing of his hat -- is his sexual arousal in any way making his action more problematic? Should I avoid hugs, because I might get a boner? Is his sexuality more about himself playing with his hat or being seen by others? Are they part of a fantasy (but then, who is responsible for my dreams)?



    and to find people with whom he could disclose his unusual interest and who were willing to allow him to indulge in their private company
    Would you really expect him to do that, tiny? I think this a very reasonable solution. However I wonder, who is harmed? Is his sexuality affecting anyone in any way? I think this is the best solution of all. But why is doing his hat thing in public a problem? People might only think he is especially polite or has an odd hat routine. I really can't find a good reason, even though it seems kind of wrong to me, too.

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by cheshire View Post
    Hello,

    I don't think Joe should seek psychological help. Is he hurting himself or others? I don't see, why the latter would be a problem. Is he in any way hurting himself? That's something Joe should decide and only Joe. If he wants a family and can't have it, because he is fixated only at his hat, well, then he should seek psychological help. Generally, psychological help is only helpful if and when someone is or causes suffering.
    I am not arguing that people shouldn't have fetishes. When someone engages in these sort of activities as an addition to normal sex, i don't see how they can be harmful. but as the original OP stated, 'Joe'# is unable to become aroused without engaging in 'hat removal'. He is unable to engage in normal sexual activities.

    Is he hurting himself? Is that really the question? Shouldn't the question be, is he able to function normally as a human being? If a child was born and was unable to walk, due to some psychological issue - would you ask if that child was hurting themselves or anyone else before recommending they receive psychological help in order to function normally?

    If someone has a medical problem, they should seek medical help. If that medical problem is psychological, they should seek psychological help.

    Should the child who cannot walk be fixed only if it wan;t to run marathons? The crux of the matter is, 'Joe' is not able to function as a normal human. It is not a matter of him 'choosibng' not to have sex or be asexual, he is unable to become aroused due to a psychological issue that prevents him from doing so.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Quote Originally Posted by cr5311 View Post
    With option 4, I could see Joe suffering from feeling that he needs to "be fixed" and is not alright the way that he is. This would not be so bad if there was a high probability of success in changing people's sexuality. From my studies, however, I have found the opposite to be true. It is more likely that this option will only cause Coodie to feel broken and guilty for something that he has no control over.
    Regardless off the possibility of success of treatment, are you arguing that 'Joe' is functioning as a normal human being, knowing that he cannot become aroused except by artificial means.

    His attachment to hats, and the removal thereof, is obviously something he was not born with, and must have been acquired through some stage of his development. Sure then, there should be the ability to reverse this.

    Even if he was born with this desire, which is highly unlikely as I don't see how his brain knew what a hat was in it's prenatal stages, that still does not make it normal. A person born with a physical defect, such as limb paralysis, would jump (figuratively) at the opportunity to have t fixed. Why are we so politically correct when it comes to psychological disorders, and refuse to name as that. They are ultimately disorders and defects.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Quote Originally Posted by Maxx View Post
    My name is really Joe. I have a hat fetish.
    lol :-)

  10. #10

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Coodie View Post
    I am not arguing that people shouldn't have fetishes. When someone engages in these sort of activities as an addition to normal sex, i don't see how they can be harmful. but as the original OP stated, 'Joe'# is unable to become aroused without engaging in 'hat removal'. He is unable to engage in normal sexual activities.
    Well, I for one think that for all practical purposes "normal" is that state in which one doesn't suffer. Its historically and generally problematic to define a "normal sexuality". What you call "normal" is a badly disgused political idea of how people should live. Its normative, not descriptive. And I don't think that this norm is promoting a healthy live, but a suffering for those, who have a deviant sexuality.



    Quote Originally Posted by Coodie View Post

    Should the child who cannot walk be fixed only if it wan;t to run marathons? The crux of the matter is, 'Joe' is not able to function as a normal human. It is not a matter of him 'choosibng' not to have sex or be asexual, he is unable to become aroused due to a psychological issue that prevents him from doing so.
    No, he is quite able to become aroused in a way that gives him jo. If he doesn't think he is missing something, I don't see why he should be treated and I don't see why he should think that anything is wrong with him. If a child doesn't want to to be "fixed" (I think this a very problematic term) and be able to walk, would you force the operation upon him? This is not about being politically correct, but about not turning "normal" into a political term which allows only a very narrow bandwith of human expression. I don't want to turn this thread into a discussion about normality, though. This hypothetical question is quite interesting in itself.



    Quote Originally Posted by Coodie View Post
    Is he hurting himself? Is that really the question? Shouldn't the question be, is he able to function normally as a human being? If a child was born and was unable to walk, due to some psychological issue - would you ask if that child was hurting themselves or anyone else before recommending they receive psychological help in order to function normally?
    There is a fascinating debate by deaf people, who say they don't want a cochlear implant, which would enable them to hear in some way, because they think they should be accepted as they are (link).

Similar Threads

  1. Can we have morality without God?
    By JuliusSeizure in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 310
    Last Post: 09-Jun-2013, 14:39
  2. Morality of Government
    By Fragarach in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 13-Feb-2012, 14:29
  3. Diapers and morality
    By JustSomeDude in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 17-Jan-2012, 13:38
  4. Morality/feasibility of RMT
    By DLGrif in forum Computers & Gaming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25-Jun-2009, 17:39
  5. Morality
    By kite in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-May-2009, 23:46

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.