Exceeded speed-limits, in traffic, may not always bring death, but that is the main element, in most lethal cases. Without fair-play, a dominant, violent, abusive person may gain some extra advantages - maybe only in short term - but, such abusive conduct may not please most, if anyone, over time.
As with the rest of Islam, the rules about sex, are gifts, as well as orders, of Allah, to the humanity. Islam, lets people regulate their energies for sex, for their own (private) fun, in a healthy way. If we were left to our own knee-jerk reflexes, our compromises would rarely, if ever, find the harmony of the principles of fair-play, ordered by Allah.
It is our remedy, to own firm-and-easy rules to avoid manipulation, in a variety of human encounters. Sex is an important case. Without fine principles, even an ordinary, honest relationship may turn to mess. Next, if there is an abuser, it can be especially torturous. We need our fine-filters to avoid the mess. We need answers about ...
Westerners tend to pigeonhole (caricaturize) Islam about sex. For many centuries, church-centered christian cultures, considered muslims as "sex-crazed." Within the last century, the pendulum bumped at the other extreme. They oppose Islam with an ideology of "unlimited sex," which is maybe the only "world-wide theme" they make sense of.
Islam is the most refined compromise, though, if not the peak of pleasure.
Two free people, are not possibly both "unlimited," together. The limit is the end of their relationship. That is the case in most encounters of such "unlimited sex" people, any way. It is even "institutionalized" with the term "one-night-stand," as a quite wide-spread case of it. Many, or most, of their "longer term" encounters end soon, too.
Not to mention that, many of them, in trenches after many wounds, raise their own ethics and/or expectations of their preferred encounter, and it is no more about "unlimited sex" but whether their best-compromises may (attempt to) rival Islam.
Sexual Abuse. "Marriage"s or divorces, may be suggested, to grab the victim's money through "marriage," if he/she is rich. It is the very old case about the witch-beings, that they (attempt to) mess with marriages. (Quran acknowledges.) Such a bewitched "marriage," itself is a life-long rape, and theft. Period. Yet, with other cases, the varieties of the abuses, which may be triggered, or attempted, by the witch-beings may be quite "unlimited," especially if the targeted person is not (muslim) religious. One-night-stands, or even sex/gender-changes, may be suggested, by varieties of witch-beings. That might serve the personal lust of the witch-being, or he/she may sell the puppet as a ["gay"] prostitute, or simply it might be a chuckling-evil witch-party, to play evil games to trap people.
Islam avoids un-married sex, and features rules for fair-play (for sex, through marriage), too. To gather (public) information about a prospective spouse (and/or probably extra-info from any preferred informaze), fortifies these, even further. (In case of a noticed abuse, in almost no time, an abuser would be known, by your informaze-referrals. Thereby, an abuser very probably cannot go on to abuse, with others, and so, may not attempt to abuse even the first "prospective" victim.) Thereby, even a trouble-maker witch-being cannot easily, if at all, meet one-night-stands, or marry-at-whim, and/or urge a couple to get separated.
By contrast, the non-Islamic trickery, such as witch-trouble may leave no preference to the victim - if whims-at-a-second, would suffice. When "nothing is forbidden by the rules," the powerful, or the talkative may oppress the victim to obey the sadisms he (or, maybe she) insists.
By Islam, an unmarried couple may not even be alone together, in secrecy. Thereby, even the rape-pills may not be applicable - if the people around, also know that he or she (the victim), follows Islam. An attempted go-to-secrecy, would elicit warnings, upon which the pill-effect would get noticed, inshaellah.
The issue is of prime relevance, when we consider issues such as limits of sexual conduct. I suggest, even to non-muslims that, they should arrange labels, such as marriable-only, vs. one-night-person. The marriable-only people may never accept unregistered relationships.
Even when the victim may think of himself/herself as "the active side," that may not be necessarily true. A "seductiveness" may be elicited through witch-trickery.
If no sense of sin, adultery, and even gender-switch may be suggested. Such a witch-attack is a brainwash, stealthily. In such cases, the word "bewitching" may fit in both senses.
Even when a person "wants" to become a homosexual, it may (possibly) be a brainwash,
gradually. It is puppetization (enslavement) attempts. The victim may not even know
about it, ever. When we notice these possibilities, it is absurd to talk about
sexual freedom, without first ensuring that people have that freedom within their minds, really.
The opposite is not the case. When a person is more-religious, unless somebody collects his/her
money, or his/her fame/prestige, he/she is not possibly serving any private interests.
Therefore, it is the safer bias, when we are not sure.
The alternative, the opposite side, is with a lot of hurtful mess.
e.g: Witch-beings (whether occult or techno) who mess with relationships.
e.g: Adultery which corrupts societies.
e.g: Physical violence (anal sex, sadism, date-rapes, killings, etc.)
Freedom is an art. We must maximize it, without being abusers. Otherwise, it is not freedom, but tyranny. The freedom for sex, is tested by the question "Are we free to reject sex, too?" I think, Islam suggests the peak of pleasures, with its set of rules, in that respect, too.
It may pop as a surprise that, Islam fosters freedom for sex, for real.
Any muslim holds the right to reject marriage.
By hadith, to stay single is not the preferred, though. Our prophet, Muhammed (s.a.s.) was married, and he opposed the attempted religious-celibacy of a person. That is possibly only about celibacy, when it is in the name of Islam. Lack of interest/appetite for marriage, is a valid reason to avoid marriage, though.
Marriage is a form of contract, and it needs informed-consent, and the right-to-reject, too. The opposite case, which manipulates its victim (through oppression-and/or-lies), is an abuse, a life-long rape.
e.g: You cannot pull a gun, either to "buy" a car, or to "marry" a woman.
e.g: You cannot call an impostor to imitate the friend of a girl, to suggest her to marry a crook you know. If that suggestion is valid/valuable for her, such that you cared to tell that lie, that is a breach-of-contract. (ifsad)
e.g: The Chinese (PRC) government was reported to be involved with whom a girl may (not) marry. (Was it "only" about the ethnic-Turkish minority girls, there? Ethnic cleansing? And/or, were they also pointing at the specific ethnic-Chinese person, to marry, too? I may find that news-item, later.) (Turkishminority only?) girl may/ought to marry (to a Chinese (a specific person?) only).
With Islam, a girl may veto the suggested marriage, even if her father or grandfather wants it. And, vice versa. Thereby, a witch-being would need to manipulate, at least two people (of two sexes, and two viewpoints).
The case about widows is different, but there, the stability of marriage is the point of protection, in the first place. i.e: It is again twice-verified.
If the husband was dead, there is no intrinsic limit, but most often such deaths may be in later age, and the problem is less probable, by statistics - unless, the witch-being wants her money.
As an extra rule-of-thumb, a widow who wants to marry, she may also ask her family about the marriage she thinks about, if she prefers to take such advice - especially, if she has children, who may evaluate the possibility, with their own viewpoints.
Many, or most, women are reported to find sex aversive, at special times of theirs. Islam forbids sex during menstruation periods, and within the period after child-birth, until after the first menstruation. This is good news for women. Those special periods may be especially the times of aversion towards sex.
At other times, women may lose their sexual-appetite. This is reported to occur, sometimes, for many women. Islam favors the husband. There is the aversion-to-reject, when that would lead to the husband's stress, that night. A hadith informs that angels would curse that woman, until morning.
i.e: Islam does suggest the wife to yield to her husband's wishes, other than when she is in her special periods. This tips her biases, for her man, rather than keep-away. There, we find the peak of pleasure, in Islam, as optimized by Allah, the Creator.
Lack of chastity, in orders of severity, trades-off excitement-for-sex, when couples give up their privacy, and save to each other, only a genital-contact, as if that were the only thing about intimacy. (They may sleep with movie stars in their minds, and may touch and watch practically everybody in the community.) It is blunted.
A worse threshold of sex-appeal, between partners, especially as time goes on. (There is a lot of others, out there. External-attraction may override the internal.)
For relief, Islam is the firm remedy, to protect our freedom and bliss, with what Allah orders. fair-play for sex.
Many people know the rules of fair-play in soccer. How about fair-play for sex? Islam presents that.
To avoid abuse
Islam does not send males out, to commit adultery. (Some third-world
traditional males may be that way, but that is not the concept with Islam itself, in any way.)
It is news, published many times. When the pub-crew tune themselves with sexual-content, some rape may follow. Next, a single rape, may be followed by tens of it. Some people appear to contrive the cases altogether. If you keep lay-people pubs, with or without alcohol, where it is a popular passtime to talk about the girls of that street, it is not necessarily about the character of the girls. Even if there may exist some criteria to not talk about chaste-girls, the sexual-bias of the males in such places, may over-interpret any "cues."
The case-relevance about Islamic female-wear is about the practice in some middle-east countries, where belly-dancers get on stage, fully covered, to strip-tease. Outside, some women may wear fully Islamic, some may not. Such gatherings, by Pavlovian-expectancies, which tune such lay-mentality sex-crazed people, may hurt some of the advantages of such Islamic female-wear to signal reserved chastity. It suggests broken limits, where it is most robust. < ! - -e.g: It is testable, whether such strip-tease-viewers, may especially (Pavlovian) be tuned to single-walking chaste women.- - >That is ifsad, built-corruption.
Meet paradox. Do maxi-skirts inspire the imagination more than mini skirts, or tight-fit trousers? Not to mention, wonderbras, etc. The sexually "most open" societies may inspire sex, but it is not probably vice versa. The case is about such ifsad-committees, not probably about a "natural" consequence of chastity of the society.
Islam does reward sex, any way. When it is within marriage, any positive relationship, is rewarded with extra heaven-points (sawab), to the eternal score, of the married couple. That is about sex, too.
In short, to such a paradoxical claim as "It may inspire the imagination," here I may respond with the counter-question: "Whose imagination?" What tunes a serial-killer, any way? Are we to empty any blood out of people's veins, to stop the serial-killers? We must do the right thing, and protect ourselves, too. Islamic rules are very well ready for it. e.g: An unmarried male and female may not shut the door, when alone together.