BlondieBC
Banned
Ahhh, so that's what's up with that.
It suggests - to me at least - that the best way to get homosexuality (defined for discussion's sake as "sexual activity primarily with one's own gender") accepted earlier is to have who you do it with not considered important.
Like the comic (warning: pony art) below:
http://twentypercentcooler.net/post/show/21741/alicorn-baked_goods-blue_body-blue_eyes-blue_hair-
Well, probably true. The problem is about taboo. Pretty much anytime I look at a religion or a societies moral underpinnings, I find food and sex taboos. It kind of makes sense. To avoid poisoning yourself, you have to have food rules. I.e. food taboos. No pork for Mohammed made sense. Not best animal in arid environment and they also fed human feces to pigs. Now 1400 years later in China, probably not a good rule.
And you have to have sexual rules for society to survive. You need some way to help insure that men/society provides adequate resources for babies to reach adulthood. Also, even if you could agree to raise children in common and it worked perfectly, you can't have unlimited sex. As the average number of partners goes up, infection rates of STD goes up faster. Much faster. And disease like gonorrhea cause infertility in women. So lets say that you have a society when the average 13 year old male gets his dream of having sex with scores of women over the next two years. What happens? The society collapses due to infertile women. Or dies off due to AIDS. or Syphillus. So in some ways, powerful men in societies are trying to balance lots of sexual opportunities for them with limiting STDs. Even if they never think in those terms.
I am not sure what he thread author wants is possible in the long term without modern medicine. I suspect, but can't prove, that if there are no homosexual taboos and taboos about older men having sex with post puberty men/boys that most young boys will have substantial experimentation with homosexual numerous male partners. And as a result, the STD rate climbs high enough to collapse society. Lets get back to Rome. Part of the instability was due to too low a birth rate in the ruling 7 families where the elites (emperors, generals, trained technicians) came from. It was recognized as a problem, and actions were taken to correct. At one point if you were a high class women, and you raised 6 sons (maybe counted daughters) to puberty, you got an award at the Coliseum. So when you give at high awards for giving birth in much the same way you give out high military awards, you know you have a birth rate problem. Note: I can't prove what actually cause the low birth rates due to lack of records. We don't know for sure.
My sister believes that a lot of the sex taboo in Christianity are rules copied because of the sustained birth rate crisis in the ruling class of Rome. Or put another way, the early Christian emperors used the new religion to try to correct a problem they had been trying to fix for a couple of centuries.
Sexual rules in society are always complicated.