# What would happen if all sexual behavior were accepted/allowed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 9, 2005, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875 "2005-12-09T14:44:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/41 "2005-12-09T21:15:49Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > I think we’d see a shift to a more Islamic **style** culture, with women and children being protected / repressed and not venturing out of the home unaccompanied lest they be raped (which would be ok under the OP) or otherwise molested. Womens’ and children’s clothes would become much more concealing - who wants to rape a skanky diseased old cow? But you couldn’t tell until you’d actually attacked them. Long-term I see women becoming second-class citizens > > Sort of like the Free Women of Gor, IIRC. Either that, or it becomes customary for women to arm themselves, and train themselves to be willing to kill. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/42 "2005-12-09T21:19:20Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > Either that, or it becomes customary for women to arm themselves, and train themselves to be willing to kill. Would that be a better future than the one **Quartz** described, or worse? ---
**Author:** ![drmark2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a87d85/32.png) [@drmark2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drmark2000)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/43 "2005-12-09T22:29:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > That might explain why every human culture has had some kind of sexual taboos. Sex is such a powerful, anarchic force that everybody, on some level, fears it. OK, then, human sexuality is a “powerful, anarchic force,” so we need to impose restrictions on it, on a societal level. Which practices are “best“ to do away with? Are we best off discouraging homesexuality, and/or bestiality, and/or rape, and/or pederasty, and/or anything besides good, old heterosexual congress between adults within the context of marriage (the latter of which I really enjoy, besides the marriage part)? ---
**Author:** ![Tevildo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Tevildo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tevildo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/44 "2005-12-09T22:38:51Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I think the OP has created a hypothetical that is so broad as to be useless as a debating tool. Can’t agree more. Absolute freedom (sexual or otherwise) only exists in the Hobbesean state of nature, which I _think_ (although **Der Trihs** ’s comment may possibly be a falsification of this) that all of us regard as bad. The real question is “are there valid reasons for making \ illegal?”. If the OP were to state what the unorthodoxy s/he objects to _is_, the debate might be more productive. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/45 "2005-12-09T22:43:29Z")
From what I’ve seen, heard, and read, the populace of Pompei was pretty liberated sexually. They seem to have gotten along. At least they did until God sent them a firestorm. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Tevildo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Tevildo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tevildo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/46 "2005-12-09T22:56:33Z")
> [@drmark2000](#): > > But “discouraging” is not the same as “banning.” _If_ you mean this, then I can’t disagree with you. I personally disapprove of gambling, but I would not support any movement to ban it. If everything (with the aforementioned caveats) is _permitted_, but if people are allowed to express their _disapproval_ of certain practices, then we’re close to establishing the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. Unfortunately, far too many people want to ban what they disapprove of. This is the heart of the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/47 "2005-12-09T22:59:21Z")
> [@Good Egg](#): > > I disagree, especially with your earlier assertion of its innate. > They would have that restraint; most folks aren’t attracted to their parnets or siblings; a perosn who is is not normal, that is, sick. Throughout history and in some modern cultures, incest in certain circumstances is perfectly acceptable. The Egyptian royalty married their brothers and sisters, and some African tribes allow father-daughter sex as a ritual blessing before a hunt. If it were completely “unnatural” no one would ever do it. Whether you realize it or not, you are a product of your socialization. Everything you believe about what is right and wrong has been formed by your primary socializers and the society around you. Babies are born with no moral code whatsoever. Later on in life what that baby is taught is fo firmly engrained into its sense of self that certain reactions (such as disgust at the thought of incest) may seem innate, but they are simply the reaction dictated by your socialization. Believe it or not, if your culture taught you that your first sexual experience should be with a sibling, you’d think it perfectly natural and look forward to it. Look at it this way: our culture teaches us that a woman should cover her breasts in public. If a woman found her top had suddenly dissapeared while she was at work, she’d be horribly embarrassed. She’d feel naked, exposed, shamed. But Amazonian women never wear tops, and probably pity American women for being so repressed. I read of an experiment some time back. Volunteers were brought into a lab and given copious amounts of water to drink. When the urge to urinate became unbearable, the researchers urged the volunteers to wet their pants. Some did, but others were actually _unable_ to do so. The socialization against wetting their pants was so incredibly strong they felt physically incapable of doing so in front of others. Our bathroom taboos are a perfect example of socialization seeming to be innate. In some other cultures, people just simply squat and pee when they feel the urge, despite who may be watching or where they are. Others use communal bathrooms (ever seen those old-fashioned outhouses with multiple seats?) These notions are horrifying to us, but are perfectly normal to others. > [@](#): > > SOme things are just by nature, wrong. You don’t think so? No, I don’t. > [@drmark2000](#): > > Why can’t we have society without taboos? What is it about us that makes this impossible? Taboos are forms of social control. Societies need rules and structure in order to get along smoothly, and also graduations of those rules. For example, running a stop sign is a “little bad” in our society, whereas incest is a “big bad.” We would not punish an offender of the first as strongly as we would punish one who comitted the latter. Human beings (and all social animals) seem to need these rules and boundaries, and every society designs its own set of rules based on its culture and environment. It’s part of a culture’s identity (and aids in that fun notion of xenophobia.) It’s also a way of demarcating status. > [@Hombre](#): > > I agree with your original assertion that a lot of trauma is societally created, but I’m pretty sure I thought sex with my sister would be icky before society told me so. No, because your socialization began long before you became sexually aware. Twins sometimes fondle one another’s genitals while still in the womb. A child’s natural curiosity about the other sex sometimes leads them to touch or explore siblings until Mom’s horrified reaction teaches them quickly that it’s not okay to touch their sister _there_. ---
**Author:** ![Tevildo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Tevildo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tevildo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/48 "2005-12-09T23:09:16Z")
**Lissa** , I love your mind. 🙂 It’s a pity that Freud is so unpopular these days. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/49 "2005-12-09T23:25:11Z")
> [@drmark2000](#): > > It’s interesting to me how immediately sexual freedom, of any kind, gets interpreted as “anarchy,“ or some close approximation of it. Is this what our sexuality constitutes? > > If so, then so. Because absolute sexual freedom for ME would lead to absolute sexual repression for YOU. How can this be, you ask? I have a desire to mate with human females. I also have a desire not to have those females mate with males other than me. I don’t want my wife having sex with other men. I, however, want to have sex with many other women. But I don’t want those women to have sex with other men either, I want them to have sex only with me. If you don’t allow me to have sex with dozens of women, and at the same time allow me to prevent those women from having sex with other men, then you are denying my sexual freedom. I cannot achieve absolute sexual freedom for myself without restricting the sexuality of just about everyone I meet–the women I want to have sex with, and the men who might want to have sex with those women. And oddly enough–get this–there are lots and lots of men who have very similar sexual desires. If the large fraction of men who felt like me were given license to express our sexuality freely…well, it wouldn’t be pretty. The bottom line is that absolute sexual freedom for everyone is logically impossible, since many conceptions of sexual freedom include restricting the sexual freedom of others. How can I have sexual freedom if I can’t have sex with whoever I want? But if I can have sex with anyone I want, I’ve taken away their sexual freedom! If I want to have sex with a woman (or man), what happens if they don’t want to have sex with me? Whose absolute sexual freedom will be violated, mine or theirs? What gives other people the right to say I shouldn’t be able to have sex with them, that violates my rights! What gives people the right to say I’m wrong when I don’t allow my women to have sex with other men, that violates my rights! It’s logically impossible, it doesn’t even mean anarchy, it means nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2005, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/50 "2005-12-09T23:42:40Z")
> [@davenportavenger](#): > > I think rape is generally an act of violence as opposed to sexual gratification. Ah yes, it’s not a _sexual_ crime. It’s about violence. It’s just like every other violent crime where you ejaculate. It’s no different from if you were to go into a convenience store, pistol-whip the manager, empty out the cash register, and then come. Or if you went into a bank with a vest made of dynamite and a detonator in your hand, threatened to blow up the building, got an erection, told all the customers to lie down on the floor, started breathing heavily as your skin became flushed, demanded that the tellers fill a paper bag with hundred dollar bills while you groaned involuntarily, then ran out to your getaway car as semen shot from your penis. There’s nothing _sexual_ about that. [/Loveline] ---
**Author:** ![drmark2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a87d85/32.png) [@drmark2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drmark2000)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/51 "2005-12-10T00:09:33Z")
> [@Tevildo](#): > > **Lissa** , I love your mind. 🙂 It’s a pity that Freud is so unpopular these days. Yeah, I picked up on a certain psychoanalytic tone to **Lissa‘s** posts, and I love her mind, too. I miss Freud, as well. However, I still think his work made better literature than psychological truth. Another topic… ---
**Author:** ![drmark2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a87d85/32.png) [@drmark2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drmark2000)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/52 "2005-12-10T00:18:10Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > I’ll take a stab and predict that in the scenario proposed by the OP, there’d be an initial period of frenzied rutting, followed by a long period of people Not Really Caring About Sex any more. Instead of sex being some sort of elusive taboo prize, it’d be “just another thing”, with about as much allure and mystery as eating leftovers for lunch. Interesting observation, but why do you think it would end up this way? ---
**Author:** ![drmark2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a87d85/32.png) [@drmark2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drmark2000)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/53 "2005-12-10T00:23:16Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > From what I’ve seen, heard, and read, the populace of Pompei was pretty liberated sexually. They seem to have gotten along. > > At least they did until God sent them a firestorm. 😉 I understand that you’re kidding, but plenty of people would take that statement as literal and absolute truth. Are we punished somehow (by the Big Guy) for sexual liberation? ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/54 "2005-12-10T00:48:35Z")
> [@davenportavenger](#): > > Face it, most people don’t want to have sex with their cousins. For the record (I’ve seen others mention cousins), it’s actually [legal to marry your cousin in 26 states.](http://www.cousincouples.com/?page=facts) Also for the record, that site totally skeeves me out. ---
**Author:** ![drmark2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a87d85/32.png) [@drmark2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drmark2000)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/55 "2005-12-10T00:52:55Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Because absolute sexual freedom for ME would lead to absolute sexual repression for YOU. How can this be, you ask? > > I have a desire to mate with human females. I also have a desire not to have those females mate with males other than me. I don’t want my wife having sex with other men. I, however, want to have sex with many other women. But I don’t want those women to have sex with other men either, I want them to have sex only with me. > > If you don’t allow me to have sex with dozens of women, and at the same time allow me to prevent those women from having sex with other men, then you are denying my sexual freedom. I cannot achieve absolute sexual freedom for myself without restricting the sexuality of just about everyone I meet–the women I want to have sex with, and the men who might want to have sex with those women. And oddly enough–get this–there are lots and lots of men who have very similar sexual desires. If the large fraction of men who felt like me were given license to express our sexuality freely…well, it wouldn’t be pretty. > > The bottom line is that absolute sexual freedom for everyone is logically impossible, since many conceptions of sexual freedom include restricting the sexual freedom of others. How can I have sexual freedom if I can’t have sex with whoever I want? But if I can have sex with anyone I want, I’ve taken away their sexual freedom! If I want to have sex with a woman (or man), what happens if they don’t want to have sex with me? Whose absolute sexual freedom will be violated, mine or theirs? What gives other people the right to say I shouldn’t be able to have sex with them, that violates my rights! What gives people the right to say I’m wrong when I don’t allow my women to have sex with other men, that violates my rights! > > It’s logically impossible, it doesn’t even mean anarchy, it means nothing. Bee-yootifully expressed! I guess that the pith of the matter is that sex, at least as we’re discussing it, involves two persons, or at least two entities. This would, of course, not include masturbation. An old Marine once told me, “If it’s got a hole, a man has tried to fuck it.” But where you’ve got more than one person involved, you have the possibility of one of them (or more) feeling slighted somehow. I very much respect your conclusion that what amounts to the topic of this debate “means nothing.” Rather than walk down the well-worn path of, “Duh, I can‘t get my head around it it, so it must be a bad topic for debate,” you have chosen instead to offer an incising analysis of the matter at hand, phrased in the form of relevant questions and assertions. I applaud you, but I’m not done, yet. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/56 "2005-12-10T01:07:38Z")
> [@drmark2000](#): > > Why can’t we have society without taboos? It’s forbidden. bDOOM _kssh_ ---
**Author:** ![Good\_Egg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/96bed5/32.png) [@Good\_Egg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Good_Egg)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/57 "2005-12-10T01:16:58Z")
So, Lissa. I said Some things are just wrong. You disagreed. So you think murder isn’t really wrong, we were just brought up to think so. ---
**Author:** ![Good\_Egg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/96bed5/32.png) [@Good\_Egg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Good_Egg)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/58 "2005-12-10T01:22:44Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > If it were completely “unnatural” no one would ever do it. > > . I think you may see the error of this statement here. Lots of people do unnatural things that are harmful. If they DO them then, that makes it okay. Is that what you are saying? ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/59 "2005-12-10T01:34:59Z")
> [@Good Egg](#): > > I think you may see the error of this statement here. Lots of people do unnatural things that are harmful. If they DO them then, that makes it okay. Is that what you are saying? You may want to read her statement again. She said if it were completely unnatural, no one would do it. Since people do it, it isn’t completely unnatural, but that’s not the same as saying it’s not harmful or that it’s “okay”. Plenty of natural things are harmful, and vice versa. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/60 "2005-12-10T01:44:11Z")
> [@Tevildo](#): > > Can’t agree more. Absolute freedom (sexual or otherwise) only exists in the Hobbesean state of nature, which I _think_ (although **Der Trihs** ’s comment may possibly be a falsification of this) that all of us regard as bad. 😕 Did I give you the impression that I _approved_ of what I was talking about ? No, I was just laying out what I felt were the consequences. **Lemur866** said it better, however. > [@Lissa](#): > > Whether you realize it or not, you are a product of your socialization. Everything you believe about what is right and wrong has been formed by your primary socializers and the society around you. Babies are born with no moral code whatsoever. Later on in life what that baby is taught is fo firmly engrained into its sense of self that certain reactions (such as disgust at the thought of incest) may seem innate, but they are simply the reaction dictated by your socialization. > > Believe it or not, if your culture taught you that your first sexual experience should be with a sibling, you’d think it perfectly natural and look forward to it. Nope, it’s been tried. For example, in China it was once a custom for rich families with many sons to adopt a poor girl baby and raise her to be an acceptable wife ( makes sense if you believe in arranged marriages to begin with ). It didn’t work very well; despite the lack of taboos, they just didn’t find each other attractive. Being raised like siblings made them uninterested in each other. Another example : Children raised communally seldom marry. Another Example : Women can detect by scent how similar the major histocompatibility complex ( MHC, a molecular “label” used by the immune system ) of a man is to their own; if it’s too similar, they find his scent unattractive sexually. The Soviet tried and failed for decades to propagandize people into Communist drones; they wanted to create “Soviet Man”. They even denied Darwinism and embraced Lamarkism because of this. They failed; people are what they are, and no amount of propaganda can change people beyond a certain point. Try reading [The Blank Slate](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0142003344/102-6439398-8840113?v=glance&n=283155), a recent book on this subject. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875.md?page=4)