True, though in Melville's time the word "sperm" did also mean semen, and the homoeroticism isn't just in the word "sperm" but the whole of the passage.

Moby Dick has a ton of homoerotic scenes like the man donning the whale's penis skin as a robe, or the various bed-sharing scenes with Ishmael and Queequeg including gems like "Queequeg now and then affectionately throwing his brown tattooed legs over mine, and then drawing them back; so entirely sociable and free and easy we were," and "Queequeg's arm thrown over me in the most loving and affectionate manner."

Perhaps the perceived homoeroticism is modern?

The passage linked-to above doesn't appear sexual to me, but rather a reflection of the affection a person can feel for his fellows, and the (non-sexual) sensual joys that exist in this world.

I think it's easy to read as just plain homoeroticism - the book's laden with it, esp. in subtext, though sometimes explicitly. You'd have to consciously work to not see talking about the delight of men pressing into other men while fondling sperm otherwise. When he's talking about gaining pleasure from a man's thighs while in bed with him (a bed that previously was described as a marriage bed) it's also really hard to read in any other sense. "Queequeg's arm thrown over me in the most loving and affectionate manner... You had almost thought I had been his wife," and "hugging a fellow male in that matrimonial sort of style." Or, "there is no place like a bed for confidential disclosures between friends. Man and wife, they say, there open the very bottom of their souls to each other . ... thus, then, in our hearts' honeymoon, lay I and Queequeg - a cosy, loving pair."

While Moby Dick was slightly more subtle, Billy Budd and Melville's letters to Hawthorne and are even more heavily loaded with homoeroticism than Moby Dick. Homosexuality isn't a new thing.

It sounds to me like you are completely disregarding the possibility that this might have, in fact, been perfectly common behavior.

I think at this point you must apply Occam's Razor. It seems more likely that Melville was having fun and subtly hinting at the homoeroticism of the situation. Otherwise, you are indeed "consciously working to not see", like user nemo said above.

“It seems more likely”… based on what? From the perspective of modern repressed culture? It may indeed require conscious work to look past that.

Could be right, could be wrong, but the gp seemed to be dismissing even the possibility out of hand.

I don't know if it was common or not.

But let's not forget that until recently heating was extremely primitive, houses had almost no insulation, and European winters seem to have been colder and longer-lasting.

Staying warm and dry was a real problem, and it wasn't unusual for families and sometimes friends to share a bed because of it.

There's probably a PhD waiting for someone who can write up a thorough survey of the effects of improved heating and lighting on relationships and sexuality.

Well... what you quote sounds convincing with respects to your argument. I don't know the novels well enough to dispute, however.

My 12th grade lit teacher would likely note that we was rather squeezing seamen, and then leap into another lecture on Melville's literary craftiness. Gotta admit, though, it's a legendary pun.