^José Ignacio Cabezón. Thinking through Texts: Toward a Critical Buddhist Theology of Sexuality. Instead, in the earliest scriptural sources – in the sutras – sexual misconduct is understood simply as adultery: a man taking another's wife as a sexual partner...Now the obvious historical question then becomes this: If the early doctrine of sexual misconduct is so simple and elegant, when and why did it get so complex and restrictive – that is, when do we find the transition to 「organ/orifice mode」? The answer to the 「when」 question is simple. We don't find any examples of the more elaborate formulation of sexual misconduct before the third century CE.
agamaniya vatthu — that which should not be visited (the 20 groups of women).不能侵犯者（有20種類型的女人）
asmim sevana-cittam — the intention to have intercourse with anyone included in the above-mentioned groups. 對上述對象有性愛的意圖
sevanap-payogo — the effort at sexual intercourse. 性愛的行動
maggena maggappatipatti — sexual contact through that adhivasanam effort. 經由行動的性接觸
Ajahn Punnadhammo. Same Sex Marriage. The lay man is told to abstain from sex with "unsuitable partners" defined as girls under age, women betrothed or married and women who have taken vows of religious celibacy. This is clear, sound advice and seems to suggest that sexual misconduct is that which would disrupt existing family or love relationships. This is consonant with the general Buddhist principle that that which causes suffering for oneself or others is unethical behaviour. ("Unskillful behaviour" would be closer to the original.) There is no good reason to assume that homosexual relations which do not violate this principle should be treated differently.