Our current sexual zeitgeist is predicated on the notion that there can be purity of sexual intention. The advent of the “affirmative consent” law in California is only one example of the notion that there’s a sensibility governing an individual's sex drive. If this were really true however, then neither the sex nor any of the other physical traits governing attraction would be relevant when choosing a love object. However, empirical evidence points to the opposite being the case. Human beings are gonadally driven. They aren’t attracted necessarily to what someone is saying or thinking or feeling. These are just the icing on the secondary sex characteristics cake. Sure a nimbus of idealization allows desire to negotiate the shoals of consciousness--though it's fundamentally the palette of organs that makes the prospect of coitus, fellatio or any other sexual activity enticing. Some women like penises, others prefer to be penetrated by a dildo and still others prefer the pleasure of both giving and receiving cunnilingus. Some men love to thrust their penises into a warm vagina while others like having a penis in their ass or mouth. In one sense the human body is like one of those pitch and putt golf courses to the extent that it offers only three holes with little room for bogeys. Asses, penises and breasts are what makes Sammy or Samantha run. Civilization has created the notion of love as a rationalization for its own animal nature. Denis de Rougement wrote a book called Love in the Western World. But at the end of the day, humans are nothing more than animals who happen to be capable of thought.