i guess there is something of a continuum...

so there is sexual activity without any 'aids'
and then there is sexual activity with aids like lube...
and then there is sexual activity with aids like vibrators...
and then there is sexual activity with aids like blow up dolls...
and then there is sexual activity that clearly involves objectification of a person (rape).

i'm not at all meaning to suggest that there is an inevitable progression...

but i do think that this would be one way of laying out a progressing of 'object involved' (rather than 'subject involved' sex')... perhaps...

but then maybe the 'object involvement' cuts across kant's object / subject distinction. seems to me that it would be possible to have objectifying sex in the absence of aids and to have subjectifying sex in the presence of aids...

but perhaps there is some relation???

don't know...

the experiences we have affect the desires we have... if you watch a lot of porn involving massochistic / rape scenes then it might well make it more likely that you have violent, objectifying sexual urges (extreme example, but i'm sure it has application to more moderate forms of objectification too)

like i said... if i was involved with a person then i might give aids a go at times...

but i won't be training my body to them with respect to masterbation.

just my personal 'what is right for me' i guess.

everyone needs to find their own 'what is right for me' i understand that.... i'm just trying to explain my decision.

(i don't think it is wrapped up in prudishness or shame or disgust or anything like that. it is about reflecting on what i want sex to be about. that is what i intended to convey with my explanation).

just my thoughts. i am up for discussion (take what you will). i could come around to different ways of viewing it ;-)

but it is my present take, yeah.