One might ask if people in our society, as a matter of fact, understand sex as necessarily expressive of deep personal feelings of affection and love. No doubt that is a traditional understanding of sex, and one still shared by many. Buy Yasmin now with No Prescription required online pharmacy generic pills. But it is not shared by all. If we take a look at the history of the views and attitudes on sex in the West, we shall often find an undercurrent of a different, hedonist view: a view that refuses to subordinate sex either to procreation or to love, and asserts the legitimacy of sex for the fun of it, without any extrinsic saving grace. In the course of the so-called sexual revolution of the sixties, this view came to be accepted by a great many young people. There have been further changes in sexual attitudes since that time, but this view of sex is certainly still held by many, not necessarily as the only way they can conceive of sex, but as a part of their overall understanding of it. Anything more specific on the subject-e.g. what is the relative spread and influence of the two views of sex, or how they correlate with various aspects of social structure-could be said only on the basis of sociological research. But there is no need to be more specific. It is enough to point out that the view of sex as necessarily expressive of deep personal feelings of affection or love does not enjoy a monopoly in our society. Since it does not, since it is not the sole available understanding of sex, the first of the two connections claimed by the argument-that between sex and affection or love-is undermined at the empirical level. It cannot be assumed in each case of adultery; every such case needs to be looked into in its own right in order to determine whether the assumed connection obtains, and whether, accordingly, the argument from a deeper sort of deception applies to it. There will surely be many cases in which a person can, and does, understand and experience sex as an integral part of a deep personal relationship with his or her spouse, but also, simultaneously, as a source of pleasure and nothing more, when engaged in with other persons. In such cases there need not and should not be any such deception.

Moreover, even if the view of sex assumed in the argument were, as a matter of fact, the only view available in our society, there would still be room for asking whether we should think of sex in this way, and in this way only. There are things to be said for sex with love-but there are also things that can be said for sex without love, casual sex, enjoyed for its own sake and understood as not entailing any further commitments.