It occurs to me that, since I neglected to do so earlier, I should point out that from parents tending to be conformist in their parenting it follows quite generally that as regards the opinions which parents especially use to inform their important parenting decisions, people quite generally will tend to be unusually conformist. In particular, parents in parenting especially need to protect their children from depravity. Therefore, one may suppose that the general attitude of people toward depravity would tend to be (a) stupid on account of it merely comprising the few opinions of those who are independent enough to think for themselves about it, and (b) conformist. It is clear to me that there are but few people in this world willing to hold weird opinions about what constitutes depravity; most people just go along with their impression of standard opinion thoughtlessly. At first I thought this was because, quite reasonably, those who in some sense think themselves abused quite rightfully tend to be hesitant to use their viewed-as-impure sensibilities. And though there are people clean as snow, Where is the person so sanely confident in the own purity of her innocence that she will not to some extent feel compromised and ashamed at times? This insane tendency toward conformity, which affects us all (though it be actually desirable in the person addicted to abuse), does cause clean people to undesirably be conformist. However, such conformity strikes me as rather general as regards sexual matters. No, there is more to explain the general indifference to the truth of the particulars of the evil of depravity than just collective insanity; much of this indifference arises merely because a parent rather than a daughter generally make the key decisions as regards if a mate or would-be mate of the daughter is abusive of not. Should then girls mostly judge depravity for themselves instead, leaving mothers mostly out of the equation? No. Notwithstanding that such custom would in the long run more make people think for themselves about sodomy rather than just adopting standard opinion, it isn't worth it. That girls (and boys, too, for that matter) be well-protected from sodomy is just too important.
Anyway, conformity explains the otherwise surprising failure of many people to see that sodomy is likely an evil addiction in the very simple sense that semen likely contains chemicals that are addictive and capable of being especially well-absorbed by the digestive system. And notwithstanding the truth as regards sodomy is simple and black-and-white, it is well for the anti-sodomite to suspend his general disdain for the ad populem argument. Notwithstanding people believing something just because others do tends to make me grimace and shake my head, I can see the desirability and importance of pointing out to others that during much of recorded history sodomy was in fact mostly viewed by people as a vile addiction, and will be accepting if, unlike with my well-reasoned hate of sodomy, someone's hate of sodomy is based merely on a desire to hold traditional 19th-century opinions there. Mostly unenforceable or unenforced anti-sodomy laws, laws against sodomy marriage, these restrictions perhaps may not seem important in themselves, but if for nothing else than that they are reflections of societal attitudes that create in the herd impressions of these societal attitudes, they are important and useful, even if not as useful as explaining the truth.