Smircle, I'm aware of that, and I was waiting for the argument, since it's basically true. However, I do not think that a degree of caution really describes a wholesale revocation of human nature. A little less anonymous fvcking might be looked at as good hygiene and nothing more. It doesn't need moralizing, you can put it down on the same level as eating a proper diet, not binge drinking or smoking. "Look after your health", as opposed to "look after your soul." You say technology is better, but admit that practice counts when you note the example of hygiene.
In truth, untill we move towards each other, we're both wrong, insofar as each of our stances are incomplete. Technology and practice (on a systemic level) are part of the same entity. Think techne which might be something you make, but also something you know how to do/something you do. Technology and practice fold into each other.
It's interesting to me, that when I say "rethink" the automatic reaction is that I have said "revoke."
Take the examples of prostitution/polygamy:
It could be rethought via, legalization, licensing, TESTING, and controls, and not neccessarily criminalization. Likewise "polygamy" might be rethought WRT age of consent and spousal/custody rights rather than outright monogamy.
In the developed world, I wold say sexual freedom also needs to be "rethought" and a myriad of guilt assuaged before we can say that we're providing a real balance of safe sex teaching. The guilt heaped on by the church is without equal, but the libertine fantasy of freedom creates it's own problems. I know of kids (young teens) pressured into sex because they are surrounded by a culture that tells them it's not only OK, but that they need to do it because it's everyone else is and it's safe too, so what's wrong with your daughter, dude, why doesn't she put out?
This all goes to my point about suggesting that people look at what they do and not just how they do it. The second you ask people to control themselves, you're automatically branded a prude, a bigot, a consevative moralist... etc etc
The rights and abilities of the person to determine their own behavior can be (and have been) assailed from both sides. I think it is possible for both the religious conservative (moralist) and the laissez faire sexual libertine to fail us when it comes to providing a balanced solution. So far, they both have.
I've never really had a problem getting to know a woman before hopping into bed, wouldn't have it any other way, which is not to say I didn't want to fling myself into a few sacks over the years, but ultimately I've always been able to find a wise balance between sex, (temporary) abstinence, and relationships. I really do think it's a gross exagerration to say that most people can't control themselves enough to slow it down a little, be more selective of their partners, and, yes, put on the damned condoms!