Re: amazing that we choose the wire monkey ...

That assumes sexual and non-sexual touch are distinguishable.

If there is a possible distinction, I submit that it cannot be culturally neutral.

Of course, it doesn't really need to be culturally neutral; plenty of lawmaking everywhere is not culturally neutral.
So while that is an objection from the universalist, it doesn't have to be accepted by the culturalist.

So, let's suppose we have a consensus distinction, one which isn't culturally neutral but one which nobody is questioning - belonging to the same culture, we would guess.

It will still not be paraphilia-neutral (for lack of a better word.) Each one's sexualities are different and what is sexy to one isn't to the other. Just look at Gimwinkle's post in the other thread: in his view, penile touch isn't sexual. To him it isn't. Even though the culturally neutral distinction probably would have it as sexual touch. In his case, the banning of penile touch is irrelevant to his sexuality. Same would be the banning of anal touch. Otoh, for some, the banning of either would be directly affecting them and their sexuality. These are easy examples, but about every body part (and body function) has both its fans and some people who are entirely indifferent to it. Even under a cultural consensus, the distinctions will always have some with a great source of stimulation banned, and some with a great source of stimulation perfectly allowed. And its opposite, of course, some for whom a certain ban is irrelevant and some for whom it is crippling.

It is arguable that such laws are simply not treating everyone equally. That the ban on anal sex doesn't treat Gimwinkle equally as it does an anal fan.

I'm not even opposed to sexual touch between non-humans of any age. :-)

Did I tell you? I am not actually a hoomin. I am a shape-shifting reptile. Alex Jones can verify this. And my LGFs are shape-shifting reptiles too. So your AOC's don't apply to us.

Come on, if people are allowed to change sex, why not changing species?

Moar seriously, do you remember that line which people against animal rights say, "now animals have more rights than hoomins?" It's good as rhetoric, but except for children, usually false.

Well, you have really taken that to new heights. You are literally giving more rights to animals than hoomins. In your society, we'd literally be better off being defined as animals than hoomins.