short essay in response

Your task is to write a short essay in response to these questions. Each essay should be roughly 500 – 600 words.

1.    The pre-amble to Bill C-36 includes the following statement: Whereas the Parliament of Canada recognizes the social harm caused by the objectification of the human body and the commodification of sexual activity. Choose either Nussbaum or Estes and explain how her argument about sex work would either support or call into question the above claim. Raise an objection against the philosophical argument you have explained and try to think of one way the authors view could be defended against it (if you think it can be defended if not, explain why not).

2.    Here is an excerpt from SEX ROBOTS: The future of sex? by Liz Braun for the Toronto Sun, March 10, 2018: For somewhere in the neighborhood of $10,000 US you can buy a permanent companion who looks and feels quite lifelike, much like motion capture at the movies seems quite lifelike until you get to the cold dead eyes, of course. Heres the thing with these synthetic sisters: they have sensors in the expected places face, breasts, waist, mouth, vagina and when you touch them there, they wriggle and moan with desire. Samantha is capable of having an orgasm. The robot dolls come with life-like vaginas which can be detached and placed in the dishwasher for cleaning. Theyre warm to the touch thanks to internal heating. Those ordering the dolls can choose from different eye colour, labia looks, wigs, nipple colour, breast size and personality traits, among other things. Somewhere, Pygmalion is celebrating. Its kind of depressing to report that the primary impetus for so-called technosexuals to buy one of these dolls is not sex. Its loneliness. The people busy creating cyborg sex partners hope that humans develop real emotional relationships with their dolls.
Provide a brief explanation of both Goldman and Nagels accounts of sexual perversion, and whether or not you believe they would consider the use of sex dolls such as the ones described above sexually perverse. Whose account do you think provides the best explanation of this particular case? Explain your answer and support it with reasons. Is there any reply someone defending the other theorist could give to your argument?

3.    Explain McKeevers argument that sexual exclusivity can add value to romantic relationships, but that the dominant cultural norm in favor of sexual exclusivity can detract from this. Do you agree with her argument? Offer your own reasons for agreeing with her or not and consider a possible objection to your argument. Is there reason to think sexual exclusivity is the best way to add this kind of value, or are other ways potentially just as effective and meaningful?

find the cost of your paper