"Hands-on demonstrations or experiences with other people of sexual arousal have virtually no added value with regard to those desired improvements."

Its a warped view of human sexuality that claims to be sex-positive about theoretical knowledge but which argues that experience is an unnecessary and harmful element of an otherwise wonderful imaginary sexual expression.

Solo sex is perfectly valid.

So is the game of solitaire, or single-player computer games.

But the reasons we dance, play and ( yes ) touch for affectionate pleasure are about interaction with others.

I think that we are presently looking at the results of a generation of near-autistic children whose parents are so fearful of outsiders that their child doesn't know how to play with others.

Its even worse when it comes to physical contact.

We've seen the results of the Romanian experiment on whether self-contact is enough physical affection to sustain a child.

And we also know very well that despite what the sex-negative would have us believe, good sex just doesn't spontaneously arise out of nowhere. Like most any human activity it is a lot more cultural than merely instinctive.

Even feral children eat. None cook, or can be said to eat for pleasure.

Treating sex like some activity that must be developed solo in isolation leads to a large and frustrated multitude.

And we know, anthropologically, that the sex-negative cultures are more violent towards others and towards self. There are consequences to denying that others need physical affection.

Dante