Debate Guide: Sexual repression as a tool of the state
The state, through its punitive agencies has throughout its history assumed the role of determining which personal relationships should be permitted and which should be punished. It is clearly in the State's interest to moderate people's behaviour in such a way. Let's look at a recent example:
Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and traditional church influences. These dogmas, ideologies and restrictions formerly allowed the state a degree of stability, predictability, and control by indoctrination of those who knew no better. The agenda of the modern state, naturally remains focused on massive investment in stable, long-lasting and predictable family units: the middle class, (preferably) heterosexual, nuclear structure and associated moral values. And therefore we have some degree of predictability through, easily propagated "truths", lack of meaningful or challenging social diversity and the propagation of the "social lie" of a non exploitative order. The order promoted by these values helps ensure a stable economy and national morale.
One particular threat to the state's control over its populace is the expansion of personal and sexual relations outside of its approved unit(s), since these contacts cannot be moderated and tend to have the effect of subverting established belief systems. This can happen by mere exposure to a wider range of social philosophies, particularly those which borrow power not from approved institutions such as family and state, but from unvetted individuals. In particular, any degree of free choice expressed by those over whom the state "should" have most control, i.e. minors and their potential mentors and sex partners must be neutralised as this represents a malignant form of subversion; of civil disobedience. Because sexuality is such a fundamentally human and highly desired expression of individualism, any true, meaningful diversity and freedom in these spheres comes at great cost and compromise to the nation state.