Desires imply a deep connotation with sovereignty over the weak, which is dehumanizing.

Wehrs 11:
Of course, the "joint" cannot be read innocently after Tristram's romps with noses and whiskers, but

the connotations are also

reinforced by fitting into the "world" represented by Tristram's own story. The abbess and novice embark upon a journey
in an effort to be relieved of a stiff joint and an enflamed middle finger (353); like Toby, Walter, and Tristram, they become protagonists in a narrative because they seek to

[we] assuage desire and struggle to deflect its sovereignty through

language. They divide "bou/ger" and "fou/ ter" between them in an effort to move their mules forward, to continue their journey and
narrative, without speaking what they would have heard (357).

The word desire is problematic because it victimizes people into endless cycles of abuse. And, it abuses people by connotations of contempt since we enforce our views on others. Wehrs 2:
Seeking fulfillment, one enters a narrative quest for dispensation from desire, for self-possession and individual integrity through freedom from being "governed by this wicked stiff joint." Peter Brooks observes

[there is] the "paradox" that desire engenders

narrative as a means of reaching a fulfillment that would abrogate desire and dispense with the need for narrative: "narrative desire is ultimately, inexorably, desire for the end" (19). Sterne suggests that such narrative quests never reach an end. Fulfillment is always deferred because desire makes one vulnerable to victimization by unpredictable events and by unregulated linguistic connotations. Circumstances and words leave one open to the lure of new, digressive narratives. The
abbess is stranded on the road; her narrative has no end. Similarly, Toby and Walter remain constantly "on the road" towards a fulfillment they seek variously in linguistic reconstructions of the past, emplacement in military, pedagogic, scientific rhetorical norms, and the situating of self as head of a family, as part of a domestic narrative. But as Don Quijote's attempts to achieve a secure textual identity,

and the [there are

always] attempts of others to reduce him [people] to one, are constantly undermined by secular experience's
equipollence of implications, so

the efforts of Toby and Walter to immunize themselves from desire are

constantly frustrated by the unpredictable in experience and language, which repeatedly sets them off
in new narrative directions by projecting new ends (in both senses) of desire.

The two main narrative structures (Tristram's progress from conception to circumcision, Toby's progress from sieges to the widow Wadman)

[these] are built upon victimization by sex as the clearest indication of this vulnerability. Stories and the linguistic self-projections that adhere to them are cut off by events which redirect desire towards a new goal, opening a new story and self-projection which is in turn cut off by yet another unexpected opening; one's "history" may aspire to the coherence of Aristotelean plot, but it
1

Donald Wehrs, Sterne, Cervantes, Montaigne: Fideistic Skepticism and the Rhetoric of Desire, 1988. CREDS: Donald R. Wehrs, Associate Professor, received his PhD from the University of Virginia. He specializes in novel genre and history, eighteenth-century studies, postcolonial studies, and comparative literature and has published articles in MLN, SEL and ELH. He is currently working on the relationship between ethics, cognitive science, and literary history.

becomes a digressive circuit of desire that remains in principle open-ended. Because the individual's "life and opinions" is posed of a network of unfinished stories, his "history" lacks the narrative resolutions that would reduce an equipollence of conflicting interpretative possibilities to clear order.

The word desire dehumanizes and dominates women because of its connotation with a predominant distinction between men and women. This appeals to how the word was created, specifically by men, so dont buy their arguments that they dont mean to oppress women, they already have. Roy2: Desire is a very intriguing subject to poets, philosophers, psychologists and to every inquisitive human. Desire is shaped by several factors which could have physiological and endocrinal explanations,
psychoanalytic, sociological and philosophical explanations.

Desire is a fundamental force of human existence

and the primary manifestation of sexual energy and is present in all human beings without which survival would be
meaningless. Desire

can have negative connotations with societal pressures on controlling desire,

or [sometimes] desire is positive and constructive although aggressive impulses lead to destructive desires as well.

Desire is the root of all human activity from creative pursuits to business pursuits and we are all motivated by one form of desire or another and these may be a desire for fame, desire for benevolence, desire for money, desire for admiration and popularity or even desire for power. Of course this is not an exhaustive list of desires and the range of desires could vary according to the range of human emotions and experiences.

The

manifestation of desire[is] could be largely restricted by society and there is a huge difference on how society perceives desire in men and women. Society still remains hypocritical as far as sexual desire is concerned and sex or sexual desire is not talked about freely. In fact negative perceptions about sex are rather widespread in which men are considered as sexual predators and women are the victims [and men are dominant]. At best sexual desire in men is still accepted although sex desire in women is
still perceived with certain skepticism. This would not be the right kind of perception as both men and women should have a healthy sexual drive and negative perceptions in society are detrimental to one's moral and sexual development.

This has two-fold impacts: first, the affirmative dominates women by disallowing them from discussion making any kind of desire about whether or not the resolution is true, and second, whenever the affirmative talks about desirability or uses the term they affirm that men are dominant over women.

Saberi Roy, The Psychology of Desire, 2009. CREDS: Writer-analyst-speaker and writes on various subjects such as philosophy, history, politics, psychology, religion and sciences. Master's degrees in Psychology, Study of Consciousness & QM (quantum mechanics) and in Philosophy of Science and also has diplomas in Management, Journalism and Counseling. Author of two books - Chronicles of Desire and Reflections in Psychology(I)& (II) (forthcoming).

This isnt an argument about the term of art sexual desire, my argument is that there are deeply rooted and negative social connotations between sexuality for the philosophical term desire. Women cant express what world is desirable because the word dominates them and means their desires dont matter. The solvency is that we reject using the word desire in our discourse, and instead strive to evaluate worlds based off of moral preference which equates to a better morality. This is the only way to escape the negative discursive implications. Wehrs 3: The more desire is concretized, as it is for the Strasburgers in Diego's nose and as it is for the widow Wadman in Tony's
manhood,

the more its pursuit becomes futile; instead of approaching fulfillment, one

underscores its inaccessibility. No finite "thing" can satisfy a yearning to escape the partiality of all finite compensations. The Strasburgers forfeit their liberty, becoming "so weak a people, they had not
strength to keep their gates shut, and so the French pushed them open" (196); the widow Wadman loses Toby's companionship once she alerts his modesty and so increases the loneliness she sought to relieve

He continues
Sterne differs from Fielding by refusing to entertain the possibility that the new genre of the novel might evade such failure. The great promise of Richardsonian fiction lay in its claim that mimetic, plausible narrative could secure inductively certain interpretation;

instead of

reinforcing the division between those whose "own ideas" are mirrored in a narrative argument and those whose ideas are not, the novel would put an end to the division, "[instilling]
religion and

morality "in "so probable, so natural, so lively a manner" (Richardson 31) that there would be a seamless

web between mimesis and meaning: an accurate representation would pass, of itself, into moral teachings.