What is the function of taboos in a society?

[mstbooblover]

I guess there must be reasons for taboos to exist. I still wonder because of all the collateral psychologic damage they can cause. As with the law, if something is forbidden, explicitely or not, it means some people did regularly what was prohibited or taboo.

[JamesDiaz11]

Taboos, at their core, function to form a lower guideline of what is considered normal, which is a shared way of approaching life and the world. People who have these shared guidelines, i. e. culture, form peaceful and cohesive societies.

The taboo, or counter-norm, itself doesn't have to have real importance. For example: in Iraq (at least the places I was) they have 5 prayer calls a day. At every one of these prayer calls the men would flock to the mosques, and the women would go do their thing in the houses. This formed a shared culture to build trust around, because everyone trusted that their neighbors believed and acted as they themselves do.

When norms are changed, or foregone, there is a chance that an important boundary has been crossed. For example, we don't marry our siblings. Upon first glance it doesn't make logical sense, especially if you're similar age and opposite sex, but the norm against doing so is important to prevent complications from inbreeding (disease, mutation, etc.). Homosexuality is another practice that was taboo, likely due to the spread of disease, and the importance of reproduction (if men's sexual energies are directed toward other men, and the population doesn't grow- especially after warfare- the society may be destroyed by a larger enemy).

However, since the Enlightenment era, the founders of Liberalism and those who emphasized the scientific method, we have both questioned and ignored taboos. After all, if we don't know why not to do something (constrained by our current knowledge) there's no reason we can point to in order to NOT do that. There are many other taboos that are likely to go away before society collapses, which will almost assuredly include sexualizing children (the Left is already doing this).

[mstbooblover]

Very interesting explanations. You're also the second person to mention "sexualizing children" by "the left". This surprises and puzzles me. Can someone explain what this is about? In any case, whether from the Left or the Right wing, no one in their healthy mind want their children to be sexualized. I'd like some explanations.

[JamesDiaz11]

Sure. Traditional sexuality valued virginity, uniquely that of the female, and relegated sex to marriage (sex outside of this was seen negatively- as was the idea of sex purely for pleasure). The left has taken the stance that sex is positive, empowering, and should be enjoyed by all without limits, and outside of the constraints of a relationship- or at least a traditional one.
Homosexuality, Polysexuality, etc. At this point nothing among adults remains taboo. Furthermore, innocence/ virginity have been defined as archaic "constructs" (and when the Left uses this term it means it doesn't actually exist).
So, we've established it is the Left that have opened sexuality into something that can, and should be done so (and permitted) purely for pleasure.
Children were traditionally off limits, but this is no longer the case. Transgenderism/ transexuality/ homosexuality are now being expressed and promoted to children. Gay pride parades, with naked men, now feature children- and Leftists are encouraged to bring their children to them. Drag shows, overtly sexual in nature, are now presented to children, and include children among their performers (who are often pedophiles). Leftist instructors now are teaching sex-ed to elementary schoolers, which includes promoting masturbation.

[JamesDiaz11]

(Continued): Legally, childrens right to consent to these things have been limited, but via transgenderism the State (pushed by the Left) have eroded these protections. Children can now have abortions without notifying parents. Children can now "transition" their gender, without notifying parents, and if parents object they can have their children taken away (this is already the law in Canada).
Children can now legally have surgeries, which are being marketed to younger and younger children, as are puberty blockers with little the parents can do. Therefore, the status of "off limits" that children once enjoyed is gone.
If traditional sexual morals are gone, and sex is positive, then WHY is sex not okay for children? It's a circular argument to say they can't consent because they can't consent. If they can consent to surgery, being homosexual, etc. they can consent to any manner of things. If it's physical limitations, then the Left has already shown they are willing to use SURGERY to make these things possible for children.
At the same time, attraction to children is having the stigma eroded by the LEFT (e. g. minor attracted adult, pedosexual, etc.).
Take these things together and one can plainly see that moral restrictions on sexuality have been erased by the Left, and age restrictions on children have been erased by the Left. It is only a matter of time before these two moves collide.

[mstbooblover]

I get your point. There's indeed something to be worried about. Thanks for having answered.

[MadKez]

@mstbooblover Then would you approve your 14 year old son being preyed upon and exploited by an adult woman? You statement about not wanting your children sexualized is fake and very worrying

[KerriH]

@MadKez what is this about?

[Price511]

Taboos typically worked as lines to never cross for a society or for anybody. Typically a lot of these taboos stem from some sort of moral or pragmatic reason. Things like pedophilia and incest are considered as taboo, and for good reason (taking advantage of kids sucks and inbreeding can cause a lot of harm to the kids), while other things like waiting till sex for marriage (there was a lot less control for STDs back in the day so it was good to avoid it altogether by only having sex with one person) or flirting with women in public areas (some sort of societal shame? I forgot what exact reason it was but it was seen as unruly) started to become defunct as technology advanced and societal expectations changed.


Taboos could very well change based on the era and society, but typically they exist for a reason. Whether or not that reason is defunct or not is for those that desire to question them to decide. (Don’t question the first two I mentioned though. It is universally considered a bad move to question it.)

[mstbooblover]

Very well thought answer. Thank you man :0)

[MadKez]

Taboos are there for a reason. They are things people don't often do, or are considered socially unacceptable. This can stem from old traditions or stereotypes or proven experience. Those taboos that have proven to be dangerous, like pedophilia, are illegal. Not all taboos are equal, but generally they are do to deter people from commuting certain acts.

[mstbooblover]

Thanks. Good reasoning. But I suspect that if some actions are taboo, then it is precisely because they are done very often while causing damages in one or another form. That why some forms of hypocrisy appear: every well thinking person avoiding talking about taboos, but secretly acting otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Taboos are designed based on ethics & morals and furthered by a cultural and societal belief system. They even exist in animals, incest in many species in the wild is very limited because it is far more detrimental to engage in than not.

[LadiesFavoriteToy]

When it comes to LGBTQ and trans people anything goes including sexualizing children.

[mstbooblover]

I'm not sure to understand completely what you mean. LGBTQ people are somehow searching their identity, and sure sexualization seems an important part of the process. On the other side, stating they sexualize children is maybe a bit far fetched, but to stick to the topic of taboo, let's keep in mind that children are not always innocent. Every parent knows that deep inside themselves, and many of us either, whether hetero or member of the LGBT community. Things are not black or white. Maybe the taboo here has a slightly more positive effect than the collateral psychological damages.

[rsuckin]

That's what's wrong with this world today people worry about other people's business fuck

[InsecureLivesMatter]

Only Republicans and neocon "independents" still embrace that idea. We leftists and progressives do not

[joeldalton]

To keep societies running.

[mstbooblover]

Please develop your interesting idea.

[joeldalton]

It's taboo to shit in the street. It's taboo to fuck your sister. These taboos keep our streets clean and keep us from having a generation of mutant children.

[mstbooblover]

OK, that's one point indeed. Mind that there's only 1 chance out of 4 for a child, resulting from a union between brother and sister, to be degenerated. Don't you think some taboos in some way try to fight against behaviours leading to fights and wars?

[joeldalton]

Not really.

[mstbooblover]

I meant within a family. Father and mother are a couple. I can guess that their daughter seducing the father will lead to big fights in the household. Reminds me a bit of the 10 Commandments.

[Anonymous]

Jealousy.

[mstbooblover]

OK, I guess what you mean, but could you tell a bit more?

[Opinion Owner]

Maybe I'm not understanding your question, but I'll relate a question I read on this site.

A girl is talking about her roommate. She says that she herself is a prim and proper girl, and her roomie is a slut. She said that her roomie goes on at least 7 dates per week, eats in fine restaurants, goes out drinking and dancing, and is always receiving nice gifts.
Herself, on the other hand, sits on the couch in the dark every night and cries herself to sleep.

So I would say that the label of something taboo is a self defense mechanism to justify crying yourself to sleep every night. Sure, she's miserable and lonely, but at least she's not a slut like her popular friend.

[mstbooblover]

Probably the right path is somewhere between those two behaviours. I don't think that being miserable and lonely are the goal of life. Everyone should still live as they feel like, as long as this doesn't harm other people. We can't please everyone either...

[Opinion Owner]

My favorite song lyrics are that of "Garden Party."

"But it's all right now
I learned my lesson well
You see, you can't please everyone
So you got to please yourself"

[mstbooblover]

That's indeed a way to see things, whatever the interpretation of "pleasing oneself" ;0)

[Charliefretz329]

Safety and precedent

[mstbooblover]

I guess what you mean, but can you develop a little those two points?