I agree that strictly non-sexual social places are more efficient at… whatever their goal is… simply because people are not distracted by sexual games. One way to achieve that is to have groups of the same sex… assuming heterosexuality, or at least assuming that homosexuality is sufficiently repressed. But another way is to explicitly make sex taboo… that is, repressing sexuality in general. (Not everywhere, just at that one place.)
Something like that effectively happens at the modern workplace; we are supposed to behave asexually. But there is nothing intrinsically modern about this; people were also supposed to behave asexually in a medieval church. The main difference was, church was only on Sunday morning, work is 40 hours a week. You had plenty opportunity to meet people outside the church. The opportunities to meet people outside a 9-5 job are more limited.
Another example: when you are in a group therapy, you are expected to behave asexually there. (Otherwise, it might turn into an orgy. Or a massacre. Or both.) Sometimes the rules say that you should not try to approach sexually the participants even a few weeks or months later, although there is obviously no way to enforce such rules. But the idea is that you shouldn’t even be planning future sexual activities during the therapy.
(A more sensitive example: Should people make sexual proposals during rationalist or effective altruist meetups? There are strong opinions in both directions, but the underlying idea is that there is a tension between personal sexual satisfaction and the social fabric working as originally intended.)
tl;dr—abolishing sex games at coed scenes is possible, but you will also meet some strong resistance
I agree that strictly non-sexual social places are more efficient at… whatever their goal is… simply because people are not distracted by sexual games. One way to achieve that is to have groups of the same sex… assuming heterosexuality, or at least assuming that homosexuality is sufficiently repressed. But another way is to explicitly make sex taboo… that is, repressing sexuality in general. (Not everywhere, just at that one place.)
Something like that effectively happens at the modern workplace; we are supposed to behave asexually. But there is nothing intrinsically modern about this; people were also supposed to behave asexually in a medieval church. The main difference was, church was only on Sunday morning, work is 40 hours a week. You had plenty opportunity to meet people outside the church. The opportunities to meet people outside a 9-5 job are more limited.
Another example: when you are in a group therapy, you are expected to behave asexually there. (Otherwise, it might turn into an orgy. Or a massacre. Or both.) Sometimes the rules say that you should not try to approach sexually the participants even a few weeks or months later, although there is obviously no way to enforce such rules. But the idea is that you shouldn’t even be planning future sexual activities during the therapy.
(A more sensitive example: Should people make sexual proposals during rationalist or effective altruist meetups? There are strong opinions in both directions, but the underlying idea is that there is a tension between personal sexual satisfaction and the social fabric working as originally intended.)
tl;dr—abolishing sex games at coed scenes is possible, but you will also meet some strong resistance