27 February 2006

The Morals of the Story

"Sorry, dear. I really can't think of any other position."

Questions of morality have been popping up in the comment section of Mr Wang's earlier post about Tammy of the Infamous Lost Handphone. Mr Wang will not tell you what to think about these morality issues - but will merely suggest to you how to think about these morality issues. And you can form your own opinions.

Let's begin by asking ourselves a series of questions, to which, depending on your values and opinions about sex, there could be different answers.

    1. Is it morally wrong for a married couple to have sex?

    2. Is it morally wrong for a married couple to film themselves having sex, the video being intended for their own private viewing only?

    3. Is it morally wrong for a married couple to enjoy oral sex or other "kinky" forms of sex?

    4. Is it morally wrong for a married couple to film themselves having oral sex or other kinky forms of sex, the video being intended for their private viewing only?
Mr Wang expects all normal people to answer "No" to Question 1. Mr Wang expects (but he could be mistaken) the majority of people to answer "No" to Question 2. Mr Wang also expects (but again he could be mistaken) the majority of people to answer "No" to Question 3. If you answer "No" to both Questions 2 and 3, it logically follows that your answer to Question 4 should also be "No". Now we proceed to a second set of questions as follows:

    5. Is it morally wrong for a young single female like Tammy to have sex with her 21-year-old boyfriend?

    6. Is it morally wrong for Tammy and Boyfriend to film themselves having sex, the video being intended for their own private viewing only?

    7. Is it morally wrong for Tammy and Boyfriend to enjoy oral sex or other "kinky" forms of sex?

    8. Is it morally wrong for Tammy and Boyrfriend to film themselves having oral sex or other kinky forms of sex, the video being intended for their private viewing only?
Let's say that your answers to Questions 1 to 4 have all been "No". There is a strong likelihood that Question 5 will be your first "Yes", if there is going to be any "Yes" at all in your answers. In other words, you feel that Tammy and Boyfriend, being so young and unmarried, should not have sex.

If your answer to Question 5 is "Yes", it follows that your answer to Questions 6 - 8 will all be "Yes". This is because in Questions 6 - 8, Tammy and Boyfriend are young and unmarried and having sex. However, if your answer to Question 5 is "Yes" and your answers to Questions 1 - 4 are all "No", then it should become apparent to yourself that Tammy and Boyfriend should not be regarded as being particularly immoral, just because they filmed themselves or just because they had kinky sex.

After all, if it is morally okay for a married couple to film themselves having sex (such video being intended for their own private viewing only), then this shows that there is nothing inherently immoral in filming yourself having sex (such video being intended for your own private viewing only).

And if it is morally okay for a married couple to enjoy kinky forms of sex, then this shows that there is nothing inherently immoral in kinky forms of sex.

Therefore logically speaking, and based on your own answers, if Tammy and Boyfriend are immoral, then they are immoral not because they filmed themselves, or enjoyed kinky forms of sex, but only because they had sex at all.

That makes them only about as immoral as every other young, single person who is not a virgin. Which is to say - lots and lots of young, single persons.

That's what I meant when I said earlier that Tammy doesn't deserve special vilification or condemnation. She only deserves as much vilification or condemnation as any other young, single person who is not a virgin.

20 comments:

Kitiara said...

morals and morality are such loaded, heavy and misleading terms that before you use them so liberally in this post, it is better to define what you mean in this context.

morals as in belonging to an overarching, transcendental Morality? or relativistic morals as decided by society? what if i don't believe in absolute morality?

do you mean principles as opposed to morals?

What is immoral anyway?

Mr Wang, refine please.

Mr Wang Says So said...

If you like, you can just ignore the word "morally" in each of the questions. I think the exercise works just as well. U

Unless of course you then start asking me what is the meaning of "wrong", heheh.

Anonymous said...

Forget about morals, what does the law actually say? Some experts, and there are lots of them out there, claim that oral sex is permissible within the laws of Singapore, provided that the act leads to the procreative intercourse. Which implies that oral sex with protected sex would be illegal. And the poor get who gets off prematurely before his wife can be impregnated with the next generation will also run foul of the law. Mr Wang, the friendly neighborhood lawyer, we beseech that you enlighten us. Please?

kitiara said...

:) wrong i can accept more easily than immoral lah

morals are overrated and taint everything with a redundant mysterious complexity . down with morals!

definitely reads better:
if Tammy and Boyfriend are "wrong", then they are "wrong" not because they filmed themselves, or enjoyed kinky forms of sex, but only because they had sex at all.

well you can always add a helpful postscript or disclaimer: wrong is a social construct - i mean wrong in this context and never in the legal sense etc etc

Anonymous said...

Death to all virgins, burn them at the stake!

Mr Jherek said...

Who cares morality is such a bore :P

So long as its private, consensual, the participants are of legal age,and doesn't frighten the cat who cares?

biased observer said...

Actually I find that a more interesting question is... Why are we all talking about 'Tammy' but never (EVER!) about 'Tommy' (or whatever his name is)? Is it because the phone belonged to her? If the phone belonged to the guy would we still be talking about and trying to out 'Tammy'?

I have very libertarian views so I don't see the 'immorality' of sex between (and amongst) consenting adults.

Mr Wang Says So said...

What is legal may be immoral.
What is immoral may not be illegal.
What is illegal may not be immoral.
What is moral may even be illegal.

And what is illegal may only be illegal as a result of some idiotic law made in the 19th century by some long-dead colonial white guy to govern the dark primitive savages of Malaya and India whom he felt ought to be punished with life imprisonment if they had sex in any way that would astound the Queen of England.

For Mr Wang's further views on the (non)-sacrosanct nature of laws, click here.

amatu said...

It's really sad to know that the singapore society is unable to differentiate between "right" and "wrong" of basic human values. The education ministry should seriously look into incorporating morality and philosophies into the education curriculum. And what are the parents doing???

hugewhaleshark said...

Yah, man. The gahmen must do something. Otherwise how will we know what is right and what is wrong!!!

Give.Me.A.Break...

trisha said...

Leaving morality aside since it's such a loaded term, I think Tammy is just plain stupid to film herself having sex on her mobile phone.

Biased Observer: If it had been Tommy's phone that was used and then stolen, then I suspect Tommy would be villified as the guy who may want to 'take advantage' of the girl should such a time come. And it would still be stupid of Tammy to allow a man to film her having sex with him.

I mean, seriously, a woman stands to lose more in matters such as this, whether you like it or not.

Anonymous said...

is it wrong for a soldier to kill? if no, then there is nothing inherently wrong in killing?

Anonymous said...

what is the universally "correct" moral to have? there is no point in discussing morals. everyone has their own opinion. it is a never ending story where each of us try to impose our morals on everyone.

Anonymous said...

When MP Steve Chia was investigated for taking nude pictures of his maid, the police found pornographic movies in his PC. The law is clear about downloading porno. But the powers that be, for reasons best known to them, decided not to persecute. Question: Was an immorality committed (the police decision to let him go)?

Mr Wang Says So said...

When Steve Chia was investigated, nobody said, "Oh, what's wrong with the 40something generation in Singapore these days? They are so lacking in moral values."

I wonder why then in Tammy's case, people say, "Oh, what's wrong with the teenage generation in Singapore these days? They are so lacking in moral values."

Or is it taken for granted that the morals of the older generation are necessarily and naturally in decline?

klimmer said...

Can someone tell me which library I can find the book of morals from?

As for Biased Observor, I think the answer is quite obvious - most of us heterosexual, red blooded males enjoy watching young naked nubile female(s). As for Tommy - sorry but I don't swing that way.

Anonymous said...

When Steve Chia was investigated, they said, "Not another dirty old man please."
When they saw Tammy in the video, "Wah, so young one! Where she learn to do that!"

amatu said...

even basic "right" and "wrong" need to be taught? wth...

Anonymous said...

It has nothing to do with morality, just the fact that having a discriminating video in an easy-to-lose item like a phone is a recipe for trouble. We should be talking about the stupidity of the act, and not its morality.


Mugster

Anonymous said...

*incriminating*


Mugster