The recent Rogan episode was a virtual call, and the guest at one point said "it is not good that this is what we are spending time talking about". Then they proceeded to talk about it for a few more minutes before I turned it off and did something else.
They say many words with interesting variations and perspectives - they make time for it on a weekly broadcast program for a few hundred thousand people who also talk about it.
"Stop talking about it." -Morgan Freeman (when asked on 60 Minutes about something else thought not to be discussed in polite company)
But if it should be discussed then we should make time for it. Sex (similar to opioid brain response because evolution causes us to associate reproduction with pleasure) is in the background of everyone's adult interactions by default. You introduce your friends to each other and association allows you to have a "vote" in the person that would be born in potentially 9 months from that evening of acquaintance (1-2 years realistically, since there is the expectation of courting around shared village getting to know each others social circle). Therefore "sex" was discussed just by saying "Hello Sally, meet my friend Harry."
Without saying anything about sex. Or variations on it. Or money paid for it. Or ways. Crude jokes are rude. An expletive every 10 words is rude. Podcast discussed that collapsing empires (post Nero Roman centuries) experienced similar fetish advertisement and public displays, suggestions or anything remotely topical in debates and decisions among elected officials and lawmakers.
As a group of friends, in the past, you may have discussed the amount of doe in the clearing next to your house, and by your friends knowledge of a herd with mature bucks routinely grazing near their own prairie - food could then be set out (Breadcrumb Trail) to introduce herds and increase the herd mass over a few seasons.
There is a sweet spot, and some states have different kill limits set by using tax revenue to curate&monitor local herds (that migrate across county lines), but you are essentially "pruning" a population (overfishing takes much longer to return from than if we allow the mass to hover at an ideal size to continue to farm from. See Joel Salatin diaper/teenage/nursing home grass metaphor to describe sigmoid curve growth rate of "solar collector" for optimal grazing routine[1]). Ideal to lure the dense, seasoned buck that has fathered many children using a female call away from where you know a herd could be so that the productive mass never sees the kill and can feel safe enough around the acreage to continue and remain "fenced" by comfort. They will nibble on commercial farmland perimeter and thus there are higher kill limits in states with lots of agriculture and intentional "buffer" land for herds to graze (some farm plots are set aside and meant as feed for wild venison source).
Here on HN about a year ago there was a journal suggesting a link to several decades of birth control in the sewage of cities running into natural water drainage and increasingly feminized fish populations (therefore reduced numbers).
Regardless of the sewage runoff, birth control has been available to several generations of mothers. This means decades of manually overriding natural hormone regimen to drastically reduce fertility "temporarily" (on purpose for sex without "consequence") until the Pill's effect "wears off". Some mothers had their children before trying "the Pill" - maybe there are entire generations of "pure" mothers who never used birth control. Could blood tests verify this?
If Chinese one child per family era preferred male fetus, then there are fewer fertile Chinese females now. If there are fewer potent American males (self castration to change gender), then that means there is a surplus of American females without fertile male mate.
[1] https://youtu.be/O7KEHzUl0tg