I am writing a paper on Kant's principle and test of universalizability. It seems that the test can allow for morally permissible casual sex (i.e., sex outside the Kantian marriage), e.g., consider the maxim “In order to satisfy my sexual desire on this rare occasion in which I am highly stressed and very lonely, I shall visit a prostitute”. Moreover, the humanity formula (second formulation of the categorical imperative) might also permit prostitution and other forms of casual sex: it is not clear that engaging in such activity implies using a human being as a mere means; for example, I'm sure Kant condemns other forms of labour (e.g., farming, accounting, in which the worker is being treated as a means, but not necessarily a mere means).
I basically want someone with some knowledge of Kant (I'm new to Kant's moral philosophy) to tell me if I'm right in what I'm saying, and that it seems that Kant is almost hinting at sex as a special moral category (since manual labour is generally morally permissible, yet prositiution isn't). Of course, this would mean there is something wrong with Kant's theory generally, as the categorical imperative is, of course, unconditionial and does not make room for special moral categories. Or, at the very least, there is something inconsistent in Kant's views on morality and sex.
Thanks!
