Two conundrums?

I wasn't clear -- maybe because I haven't thought things through sufficiently. On reading what you wrote, I realize there are really two conundrums here. 1) The one originally noted by Pharmakon in the OP -- why historically was liking both women and boys the "norm" for men but today, the numbers of such men have almost seemingly vanished? Few men today who are attracted to women (and that means most men) evidence any attraction to boys. Meanwhile, few gay men and few self-identified BLs evidence any attraction to women. You provide what seems the only satisfactory resolution to this conundrum: sexual desire is a function of both biology and culture; we live in a culture that denigrates attraction to boys, so most men "will remain dumb to the appeal of boys or not let (themselves) think about something that can only have negative consequences (for their) self-composure." That raises a different question: how our culture became so freakish, such an outlier in these matters -- not only in the denigration of any attraction (sick or evil, take your choice) among men to boys but the appearance for the first time ever in human history of a socially approved attraction among men for other adult men occurring simultaneously with the marshaling of the full force of state and cultural power against any acknowledgment of the erotic appeal of boys to men. We've seen a lot of discussion of this question which I won't repeat here, except to note that it touches on what I should have identified as the other conundrum: 2) The desire for boys (as opposed to men) stems from those elements that set them off from men -- elements that are more "feminine." See again Pharmakon's OP or what you describe as the genetic disposition of "almost all men ... to be potentially attracted to both women and boys." Yet most societies that celebrated pederasty did so precisely for its "masculinizing" effects -- to show boys how to be men. If this was just excuse-making -- if in fact, sexual relations with men feminizes boys or at least, as Pharmakon suggests, should bestow empathy on boys for the position of women, then you would expect feminists and other warriors against "toxic masculinity" today to openly celebrate man/boy sex. What better way to nip toxic masculinity in the bud than treating a boy like a woman? And yet precisely the opposite has occurred -- nothing brings on virulent storms of hatred from feminists and progressives than the slightest hint of pederastic shenanigans Of course that also stirs up equally virulent storms of hatred from the right. It seems as if the left condemns boylove for fear of masculinization/ male solidarity while the right goes into hysterics because of fear of feminization. They can't both be correct-- and I guess that's the real conundrum. SR