I think the reason we have made restrictions now and in the past regarding female sexual behavior stems from the fact that women are the undeniable parent of their children whereas in the case of men it is not necessarily certain. It’s because of this that the property of virginity becomes valuable in the sense that it is the best guarantee that a man’s children are his own, that his progeny are his property.
Before the idea of scarcity the idea of property was not such a huge deal and primative men would presumably court primative women based on visual evaluation without consultation to the earth’s revolving passage around the sun. Presumably children of that era before man had moved to colder and harsher climates would have been exposed to the nakedness of other members of the species also presumably without ill effects mentally or emotionally.
As groups of early human beings became more condensed and their reliance on domesticated food sources more evident and with it the concept of scarcity, so too did they perceive each other as resources to be domesticated. The concept of virginity became something of value and sexual behavior at this time fell under a social system of control.
Take for example the Bonobo (also known as the Pygmy Chimpanzee) where their relatively peaceful and more openly sexual behavior in comparison to the closely related chimpanzees living across the congo river has been attributed to the abundance of nutritious vegetation in their particular region of the jungle.
A lot of our modern behaviour I think is taken for granted and not called under scrutiny like this. As a result a lot of what we do flies in the face of our biological nature, such as repulsion toward nudity and sexuality except under limited circumstances.
Any honest man or woman can recall being below the age of consent and being attracted at that time to their peers of the opposite sex (ruling out homosexuality for a moment here), finding their features desirable for reasons that biologists can easily explain. Visual signposts displaying youth and vitality are themselves considered indicators of attraction which coupled with indicators of sexual maturity are preeminently desirable. Crows feet do not become more desirable as we age, nor do women with increasing signs of androgenic features, nor men with appearances of reduced virility. But their are societal limitations in place that limit the degree to which we are comfortable admitting to these realities.
In the animal world infants and juvenile’s are often involved in sexual behavior such as the aforementioned bonobo.
All I’m trying to say here is that a lot of people like to forget that Juliet was thirteen and Romeo was 18. Edgar Allen Poe isn’t spoken about primarily as an incestuous pedophile either. It seems like people no longer see human sexuality in biological perspective.
As a so called “victim” of childhood molestation myself I would like to make it clear that more than the acts themselves it is the shame concerning these acts which causes damage if any, rather than the acts themselves, and that shame arises from our societies treatment of this behavior. I am able to see that in perspective.
In this situation I wouldn’t fault the girl for her libido or the man for his just like I wouldn’t condemn Romeo or Juliet (not saying that the relationship is completely analogous). I can think of a lot of other more vicious things people are doing that I’d be worried about than people satisfying reproductive urges consensually regardless of what gender or age. Sex just doesn’t scare me that much.