Arousal and the Ends of Desire

Abstract

A sexual desire is one kind of desire, and kinds have boundaries, however uneven some are drawn and however difficult it may be for us to locate particular instances within (or on) those boundaries. A glance at what philosophers, psychologists, and lovers have had to say about sexual desire raises the suspicion that it will escape pigeon-holes. Consider some of the claims that have been made about what a sexually desirous person really desires: to feel the friction of flesh against flesh,' to elicit involuntary audible responses from others through the infliction of pain,2 interpersonal communication,3 reflexive mutual recognition (multi-level iterations of sensings of other's sensings of our sensings of them),4 double reciprocal incarnation,5 reproduction,6 love, humiliation, pride, pain and pleasure. There seem no limits to what some have been willing to propose as the true targets of our sexual strivings. The culprit for this chaos is perversion. Consider why we cannot say that a sexual desire is simply a desirefor sex. The object of the desire, so specified, will itself know no bounds. If by 'sex' we mean certain familiar sexual activities-coitus and its closest cousins, then this definition of sexual desire puts us at a loss to say how voyeurism, exhibitionism, bestiality, coprophilia, and sadomasochism could be sexual perversions. Alternatively, if we give enough slack to our sense of what counts as 'sex', and allow our conception of sexual activity to range from the blase to the perverse, then we will have assembled such a motley array of activities that we are at a loss to say how any boundary has been drawn, and so