# 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:** 7\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/61 "2005-12-10T02:51:01Z")
> [@Good Egg](#): > > 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. Well, yeah, in a sense. . . The very\* definition \*of murder varies widely. If you define it as killing of any human for any reason, then you’re forbidding self-defense and defense of one’s country. If you’re saying murder is the deliberate killing of another human being without being threatened by that person, you’re anti-death penalty. (Let’s not even get into the abortion debate.) Cultures definitions of “murder” are as flexible as the definitions of incest. In some cultures, you could kill a slave for any reason at all as long as you compensated the owner. You could kill your wife if you suspected she was unfaithful. You could fight a man to the death if he insulted your honor. Some countries still have a few of these practices. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > 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. I’d like to see a cite for this practice. First of all, I can’t imagine the wealthy/nobility selecting poor children to be a wife for their son, since dowry and social position were the primary motivators for most marriages of the upper class. (Why would a noble mix his blood with a peasant?) Secondly, what the hell does love have to do with marriage? Most marriages of the upperclasses were for dynastic reasons, with no consideration given for the emotions of the two potential spouses. They were expected to do their duty. Thirdly, I can think of dozens of instances where children raised in a communal environment had no problem marrying. (What about Native Americans who lived in large communal lodges?) And, by the way, I have read \*The Blank Slate. \* ---
**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 10, 2005, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/62 "2005-12-10T03:22:01Z")
> [@drmark2000](#): > > 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? Did you have to bring up Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell? I had almost succeeded in forgetting all about them. I won’t sleep a wink tonight. I think **rjung’s** punishment would be worse: _followed by a long period of people Not Really Caring About Sex any more._ ---
**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, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/63 "2005-12-10T03:24:04Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > I’d like to see a cite for this practice. > > \< snip \> > > And, by the way, I have read \*The Blank Slate. \* Really ? I believe that’s where I read about it. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/64 "2005-12-10T03:49:04Z")
And to comment on the **Good Egg/Lissa** debate, part of the issue is that we need a working criterion of what makes something “just wrong”. The concept of _malum de se_, “evil unto itself”, is not as clear cut or obvious as some people would think. something called “incest”, to take an example, _even when consensual_ is a crime/taboo in all societies… HOWEVER, societies vary in what is it that they DO _refer to as_ “incest”, and for half the world (or more) there’s no squick factor in banging your first cousin if she’s game. So THAT is not “just wrong” from some sort of privileged frame-of-reference, it’s “wrong” from a sociocultural or individual psychological or moral angle. So, in any case, back to the OP, my speculation is that indeed a majority of the population would NOT go ape wild. But boy would there be a whole lot more porn, the Web may grind to a halt 😉 However as mentioned earlier, the idea that “if it gets you off, then it’s OK” would be an unworkable scenario; you would have to limit the sexual free-for-all to specifically sexual contexts, lest you make anything OK as long as there’s sex in it (“masturbate while robbing banks” – Heh 😃 ) or create a climate of impending rape that actually chills your range of freedom. ---
**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, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/65 "2005-12-10T04:44:29Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > Did you have to bring up Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell? I had almost succeeded in forgetting all about them. I won’t sleep a wink tonight. > > I think **rjung’s** punishment would be worse: _followed by a long period of people Not Really Caring About Sex any more._ I didn’t mean to invoke the Christian glimmer twins, specifically. Sorry to disturb your sleep. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2005, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/66 "2005-12-10T19:01:36Z")
**Lissa** , **Der Trihs** doesn’t have it exactly right, but not exactly wrong either. It was never the custom for specifically rich families to adopt a future daughter-in-law (_tongyangxi_); the custom was spread throughout the classes. The practice (according to _Wanting a Daughter, Needing a Son_ by Kay Ann Johnson, a book which can provide a significantly deeper understanding to the history that underlies the current state of affairs in China that has resulted in people like me becoming parents to girls born across the world) was common in the 19th century. It had the advantages of avoiding “the often ruinously expensive ritual costs associated with a ‘normal marriage’, including a bridal price, but they were also able to raise their own daughter-in-law to assure her loyalty and integration into the patrilineal family.” The Pinker reference actually is not in _The Blank Slate_, but in his earlier book _How The Mind Works_ p 459, “When the couple grew up they found each other unsexy, and compared to convential couples, their marriages were unhappy, unfaithful, unfecund, and short.” He does not reference that claim. But he also points out that a similar situation has existed in Lebanon where patrilineal cousins grow up together and are encouraged to marry have similarly disasterous results and that Israeli kibbitzim had a similar problem in that kids raised communally often had little romantic interest in each other despite parents often trying to get them to marry within the kibbutz community. As to the rest of this thread … it has been said well. Some things people wouldn’t do because few people want to do them. Some of our codes exist to explain the ick factor that is hard-wired in there, to explain the behavior, rather than being the cause of the behavior. Obviously behaviors that violate other non-sexual codes are not okay just because they involve sex. Those codes are the basis of society. removal all societal codes and you have no society. Remove all codes involving sex between consensual adults and the odds are you see very little different than what you see now. IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2005, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875/67 "2005-12-12T06:36:33Z")
> [@drmark2000](#): > > Interesting observation, but why do you think it would end up this way? Because too much of the same thing bores people to tears. Or, as I like to say it, “Name your favorite foodstuff. Then force yourself to eat it exclusively for every meal. See how quick it’ll be before you’re sick and tired of the damn thing.” People (at least in the USA) get all worked up about sex because much if it is considered taboo by our outdated puritanical standards. Remove the taboo and you remove much of the allure. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-happen-if-all-sexual-behavior-were-accepted-allowed/334875.md?page=3)