Unfortunately I don't think we have data here to make conclusions, besides some basic moral intuitions, which historically haven't been the most reliable compasses for navigating these grey areas.

Nah, compare violence in media by sex/age breakdown of the victim. Excluding sexual stuff completely, it's many, many orders of magnitude more acceptable to show the gory killing of a male character on screen than it is to show the same of a woman or child.

There are all of these unwritten but extremely obvious rules that dictate what is acceptable & what is not.

OK, let's assume your argument is correct. (which I don't think is true, but let's go with that for now) Let's say that media depicting some kinds of sexual material warps what gives some people sexual satisfaction.

...so?

Should my preferences of what I find acceptable and not acceptable in that domain somehow influence what content others are allowed to consume? If the creation of that content actively causes harm, then sure. That content should be restricted. If we are restricting it because you think it's icky and it might lead to other things you find icky than we took a wrong turn somewhere.

That's like saying we should outlaw mozzarella cheese because it might lead to the consumption of triple cheese sausage pizza. Neither of those acts hurt me, so why should I care about people choosing to participate in either?