That transformation in the structure of control was necessitated by a popular movement of rebellion, but it was not of course that movement's objective. No one looked at how marriage was an institution of control in that society of those times, and thought that it would be better instead to have sex glamorized, turned into a public spectacle, and used to continue selling the last gasps of Capitalism to an increasingly bored populace. It's my intuition that the true objective was deeper, more real, had less to do with "sex" as now defined, and remains utterly unaccomplished.
The Spectacle, forced by an unusually conscious human movement of transformation to look directly at Touch, and at Sex, and at Naked Human Bodies, did an admirable job of adapting. Its main compensation seems to have been to recast the concept of "sex" in as narrow a way as possible, focusing it specifically on those sexual activities which are most dangerous & controllable. That alone might have left other sexual freedoms free to sneak around the edges, except that the new "sex" was allowed to expand its cultural role very powerfully, put not just in public but in the center of public awareness and given slack to ooze its way deep into the public mind, into the many dangerous unthinkable activities which our society unconsciously believes must somehow be restrained.
((i never finished this essay but i'm posting it anyway! maybe i'll finish it someday))