The prevalent "mainstream "claim of the possibility of safe, monogamous, "casual" intercourse finds its refutation in logic and the facts of reality. Intercourse that is both "casual" and monogamous is impossible, nor can it ever be safe.

Some might contend that "monogamy" can be defined as the practice of having only one sexual partner at a time, but does not exclude having multiple partners over a lifetime. Such a definition, however, is self-defeating. Having more than one sexual partner during a given period of time would imply having intercourse with two or more people simultaneously, which is impossible. All sexual acts would fit under any definition of monogamy which constrains sexual exclusivity to some time period; hence "monogamy," thus used, would lose all meaning. Indeed, the definition would encompass the acts of a person who has intercourse with one partner, then shifts to another five seconds later. After all, during those five seconds, he was only having intercourse with one individual! Reason, in reducing this view of monogamy to the absurd, compels us to reject it.

A truly monogamous relationship implies bilateral exclusivity and permanence. Both parties must have intercourse only with each other, and expect to never have intercourse with anyone else. For this reason, monogamy is impossible for a merely "casual" sexual relationship. A "casual" sexual relationship-one based on purely carnal interactions and devoid of intensely intellectual and emotional ones-inherently rules out the possibility of permanence. Nothing exists in such a relationship to inextricably bind the two parties to each other of their own will. Carnal lust is not enough: it fades with time, especially as individuals senesce. Furthermore, a "casual" relationship is far easier to break than a true romantic one: there are neither intellectual nor economic guarantees to hold it in place. Thus, the risk of the "casual" relationship ending in a short span of time is near-complete.

The individuals pursuing "casual" intercourse will thereafter seek other similar relationships to sate their mindless lusts. By definition, they would not be monogamous after that fact-having been in more than one sexual relationship. With a disruption of monogamy comes the host of dangers inextricably associated with promiscuity. Advocates of "casual" intercourse might contend that a theoretical possibility exists for a repeated practitioner of such behaviors to emerge from them unharmed. Similarly, however, a possibility exists that a chronic smoker might live to be 90 years old. Furthermore, one might plausibly suggest that an individual who deliberately plummets from a ten-story building might get away with a few bruises. This does not mean that either smoking or leaping from skyscrapers is safe. Furthermore-especially given today's rampant rates of venereal diseases of every conceivable character-I can safely guarantee that if you engage in "casual" intercourse, you will be irreversibly damaged, and likely lethally so.

The very assertion that monogamous "casual" intercourse is possible presumes a mind-body dichotomy, one of the deadliest ideas in Western thought. Advocates of the notion presume that the body can exist in separation from the mind-and vice versa, that a relationship can be pursued by cultivating only a corporeal aspect and not an intellectual one. But, in the words of Ayn Rand, "a body without a mind is a corpse, and a mind without a body is a ghost." A "casual" sexual relationship is nothing but two living corpses copulating with one another. A truly valuable romantic relationship must involve both material and mental interaction-seeing as the mind is material, and the body must always be subordinate to the mind's rational faculty. Hence, "casual" intercourse is not only materially but intellectually deadly. An advocate-like myself-of rational self-interest as the ultimate determinant of morality will consider such reckless behavior anything but a casual matter.

You can learn about Mr. Stolyarov’s newest science fiction novel, Eden against the Colossus, at http://www.geocities.com/rational_argumentator/eac.html. Information about his latest non-fiction treatise, A Rational Cosmology, is available at http://www.geocities.com/rational_argumentator/rc.html."