There's a simpler explanation. Those exposed to an argument are more likely to evaluate it.

It is a simpler explanation, but it is wrong.

Are we talking about some medicinal plant with remarkable properties that no one has heard of? A simple household device put to a new purpose that no one has heard of?

People are fully aware of teen sexuality, since they were all teens themselves once. They are fully aware in turn of their children's sexuality, if not all the details. A great many -- perhaps not all, but plenty to start a conversation -- are deeply concerned for their children's welfare and their immediate happiness. The reason there is no conversation is that they don't consider there to be any costs to their kids being unable to have sexual relationships with adults. What is it they haven't been exposed to? The Rind study results? If they perceived this problem with children's unfulfilled sexual needs as one meriting any of their attention at all, they'd find the Rind study.